Amputation after burst perianal abscess with fournier gangrene with necrotizing fasciitis: Medical Negligence case dismissed against medical college, doctors

The case concerns a patient who got infected with an ulcer in his right hip and he was taken to Civil Hospital, Fatehabad for the treatment. However, there was no improvement and the patient was referred to another medical college and hospital where he was admitted on 23.02.2017. The fee of Rs. 325/- per day charged from him.

In his petition, the father of the patient submitted that flesh from the legs of the patient was extracted as a sample for testing and Rs. 1700/- was received from the complainant but no bill was issued to him. He remained admitted for 8 days but no proper care was given by the facility and on account of negligence, infection in his legs increased and developed in the complete leg, he alleged.

Thereafter, the patient was referred to PGIMS at Rohtak. After examining the patient, doctors of PGI, Rohtak observed that there is a lot of negligence in the treatment given by the Medical College and infection has spread in the whole leg and the leg will have to be amputated. Hence the right leg of the patient was amputated, and he was declared as handicapped up to 90%. 

This complaint filed with the district forum was resisted by the doctors and the medical college hospital. They denied charging Rs. 325, 425 and 1700/- adding that the best treatment as per Medical Science was given to the patient. They further submitted that the patient's leg was already suffering from an infection, that is why he was referred from Civil Hospital Fatehabad to the institute. The duty doctor explained to the patient and his attendant regarding the poor condition of the patient and the need for amputation but the attendant refused and requested to refer the patient to a higher centre, the doctors submitted.

After hearing both the parties, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hisar dismissed the complaint.

Feeling aggrieved therefrom, the complainant approached the state consumer redressal forum citing that the District Forum's order is illegal and liable to be set aside because medical negligence on the part of the opposite parties is clear. The counsel for the petitioners further added that the doctors should not have admitted the patient for treatment if the disease could not be controlled and treated by the doctors concerned. The counsel submitted that no medical facilities were available in the hospital for the treatment of the patient, moreover, the patient was treated by junior inexperienced doctors which amount to medical negligence. It was further alleged that no receipt was issued for charging medicines and conveyance charges etc.