Consumer Acts on doctor – justified?

Supreme Court of Inda lays down 11-point guidelines for courts to decide on complaints against doctors. The Consumer Protection Act should be applicable to complaints where the gross medical negligence is proved without doubt. Often, the medical practitioners are forced to take some life-saving interventions or perform procedures during emergency which may not work successfully and the patient may die or due the intervention the patient may get into some other serious health complications.

Will the doctors be able to take a correct decision when the Consumer Protection Act is hanging over their neck? Can he allow a patient to die just because he is afraid of the decision may or may not save the life of the patient. May be, the doctor should be allowed to take a calculated risk to save a serious patient.

As a common man understood, the Supreme Court says that - doctors in complicated cases have to take chance even if the rate of survival is low. A doctor faced with an emergency normally tries to redeem the patient out of the suffering and the doctor does not gain by acting with negligence.

This implies that the prosecution should handle such cases with lot of care taking into account the doctor’s qualification, experience and past record. The medical negligence should be proved beyond any doubt while dispensing the justice. The above 11 guidelines will be of help in deciding such cases in court of law.