No negligence in treatment of Seborrheic Dermatitis: Consumer forum relief to Dermatologist, Polyclinic
Kolkata: Taking note of the submissions of a dermatologist that the treatment provided by him to a patient of Seborrheic Dermatitis and the fact that the patient was not able to establish any evidence for alleged negligence and unfair trade practices, by the doctor, the District Consumer Forum, Kolkata recently junked a medical negligence complaint filed against the dermatologist and the Polyclinic.
The patient filed the plea in the consumer court in the year 2016 after the legal notice sent by her to the doctor and the hospital asking for compensation for the wrong treatment was refused by them.
The case goes back to 29th Feb 2016 when the patient visited the Purnam Medicare Polyclinic for a consultation with Dr. Kaushik Lahiri for the treatment of her skin problem.
The patient in her plea alleged that the doctor had prescribed her some medicines which aggravated her skin problem spreading it in her upper body and causing fever, nausea, vomiting, etc. She visited the polyclinic for her treatment but the medicines kept on deteriorating her general health and spreading the infection.
The patient tried contacting the doctor over WhatsApp and sent him pictures of her infection but got no response from him. Left with no other choice, the patient went to another dermatologist and got cured within a day.
The patient in her plea alleged that she had suffered a lot for over one and a half months and had to cancel her business trip causing her a huge monetary loss. She in her plea submitted that she tried contacting the Polyclinic and the doctor but was not reverted and was rather harassed and ill-treated by them. She also alleged that she had sent them a legal notice for the payment against the wrong treatment but was denied. Left with no other choice, she then approached the Forum for justice with the prayer for relief.
Responding to the plea of the patient, the Polyclinic in its reply alleged that it was not the duty of the polyclinic to interfere between the doctor and the patient, and the polyclinic doesn't suggest the name of a doctor, it was also submitted that the patient had given the name of Dr. Kaushik Lahiri and herself opted to be treated by him.
Also Read:No cure of fracture not Negligence: NCDRC relief to govt hospital, doctor
The polyclinic denied all the accusations and replied to the legal notice sent to them alleging that it had no interference of the polyclinic and that it was between the treating doctor and the patient.
"The OP-2 replied back the legal notice sent on behalf of the complainant vide letter dated 09.05.2016 where it was distinctly stated that whatever dispute arose was strictly between the doctor and the complainant herself and the answering OP is no where in the scene. There is no cause of action against the OP2 since the OP2 has not performed any deficient service or practiced any unfair trade with the complainant."
The doctor opposing the plea filed by the patient alleged that the plea filed by her was unmaintainable under the law and in fact. He submitted in his reply that the patient was suffering from "Seborrheic Dermatitis" and she had visited him with usual symptoms and the treatment given to her was based on current medical and scientific evidence, ethics, and experience. Thus, the medicines were prescribed to her accordingly.
The doctor provided the details of the medicines in the reply which were prescribed to the patient by him and also the medicines which were prescribed by the other dermatologist. He stated that the line of treatment opted for by him and the other dermatologist was almost the same and the medicines prescribed by both of them were also almost similar.
He further added that the patient had come to him after a delay of about a month which aggravated the problem and took time to get cured.
"The OP1 further submits that the complainant approached the OP1 after nurturing the disease for more 28 days for which the healing was not done immediately rather it took time."
"The complainant has admitted that there was a delay of four weeks between the onset of the disease and time of her consultation. As per standard scientific evidence " Early treatment helps, delayed therapy may jeopardize the outcome."
The doctor further added that every medicine includes common side effects such as nausea, vomiting, etc. He also submitted that if the symptoms and side effects were serious in nature, the patient wouldn't have waited for three weeks rather would have reported immediately. Opposing the plea of the patient, the doctor stated that he had provided a follow-up treatment free of cost which was not mentioned by her in her plea and that when the patient had sent him the images on WhatsApp he was traveling and his network services were not supported. The doctor stated that he had immediately contacted her when he came back and told her to email her documents but she had not sent anything in the email provided to her.
"There has been no Expert Opinion for authenticating the allegations of the complainant. Simply to malign the reputation of the OP1 doctor the consumer complaint has been filed for which the OP1 prays for dismissal of the complaint."
Hearing both sides and looking at similar precedents in regard to medical negligence cited by the counsel for the accused doctor and in addition to the answers provided by the patient during the evidence, the court noted down that the patient had absolutely NO ANSWERS to the questions which were asked to her and hence, dismissed the plea of compensation.
"In fact, the complainant could not establish any deficiency in service or adoption of any unfair trade practice against the OP2 also. Mere allegation against a doctor or an institution in respect of medical negligence without corroborative evidence is very much unfortunate and unexpected of.The questions asked by the complainant to the OP1&OP2 are reasonably replied from which nothing wrong has been found. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the documents placed on record we are of the opinion that the complainant has failed to establish her case against the OPs."
"Thus all the points under determination are answered accordingly. In the result, the Consumer Complaint fails."
To read the judgment, click below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/west-bengal-no-medical-negligence-191631.pdf
