Difficult to believe Radiologist failed to detect myelomeningocele: Forum directs Karnataka doctor to pay Rs 20 lakh compensation

The Karnataka court, in its order dated June 27, ruled out negligence on the part of a gynaecologist at Ishwar Nursing Home and imposed a penalty of Rs 15 lakh on the radiologist, Rs 10,000 towards litigation fees and instructed her to keep a fixed deposit of Rs 5 lakh in the name of the child till he attains the age of 18.

The case concerns a 22-year-old woman who gave birth to a boy in June 2020, however, doctors found a 10×12 cm-size myelomeningocele on the child’s spine. Thereafter, the infant was taken to Sanjeevani Hospital for surgery which incurred huge expenses.

Myelomeningocele is a congenital condition or birth defect in which a child’s backbone (spine) and spinal canal does not close before birth. It is a type of neural tube defect (NTD). Myelomeningocele develops in a foetus during the first four weeks of pregnancy.

It is characterised by incomplete neural tube closure and a fluid-filled sac that protrudes from the baby’s back. But it can be detected during pregnancy through blood tests and foetal (prenatal) ultrasound.

The backdrop of the case is that a gynaecologist at Ishwar Nursing Home referred the pregnant woman to the consultant radiologist at Rajani Sonography X-Ray Centre in Vijayapura, to detect foetal abnormalities if any. The woman then underwent a foetal anomaly scan and several other medical tests and radiologist opined that the foetus had no sign of myelomeningocele.

As per the complainant, the radiologist had conducted the ultrasound scanning, said there were no indications for Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) since no abnormality was detected in the tests. Meanwhile, the doctor had also not taken down mandatory details of the patient, such as age, sex, address, contact number and date.

The woman, in her complaint, further said that she had taken a second opinion from a paediatric surgeon who said that the newborn will have to suffer lifelong issues, including recurrent urinary tract infections which could lead to an unhealthy life.

Also Read: Even Best Of Radiologists Cannot Be Better Than USG Machine: NCDRC Relief To Chhattisgarh Doctor

Deliberating the case, the court said;

“It is difficult to believe that the radiologist could not detect a swelling over the lower back during the scanning which had been performed on Radhika during the second trimester period. We have no hesitation to conclusively hold the radiologist liable for the negligence, who failed to diagnose the structural anomalies of the foetus.”

It added;

“Early and accurate detection could have helped the parents take a decision on whether to terminate the pregnancy within 20 weeks as per the MTP Act, 1983. The unfortunate birth of an amelic baby could have been averted. It is a well-settled principle of justice that in a case where negligence is evident, the principle of res ipsa loquitur operates and the complainant does not have to prove anything as the thing (res) proves itself.”

The order went on to state;

“In such a case, it is for the opposite party to prove that she has taken care and done her duty to repel the charge of negligence. No concrete or rebuttal evidence is put forth by the radiologist to disprove the allegations of the complainant.”

Eventually, the court ruled out negligence on the part of the gynaecologist and imposed a penalty of Rs 15 lakh on the radiologist, Rs 10,000 towards litigation fees and instructed her to keep a fixed deposit of Rs 5 lakh in the name of the child till he attains the age of 18, reports The Indian Express.