Government hospital should be equipped with basic infrastructure, patient can legitimately expect facilities are available and functional, says HC

A government hospital should be equipped with basic infrastructure facilities and a patient can legitimately expect that facilities are available and functional, observed the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court while ordering a compensation of ₹75,000 to a woman.

A government hospital should be equipped with basic infrastructure facilities and a patient can legitimately expect that facilities are available and functional, observed the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court while ordering a compensation of ₹75,000 to a woman.

The court was hearing a petition filed in 2015 by the woman from Ramanathapuram district. She sought compensation from the State. She alleged that her newborn child died due to medical negligence. The woman, a daily wager, was admitted to a government hospital in Mudukulathur in 2014. The doctor examined her and told her that she could have a normal delivery as the parameters were in order. The petitioner delivered a female child.

Since the baby developed asphyxia, both the mother and the child were referred to a government hospital in Paramakudi for further treatment. As the baby required ventilator support, they were referred to Government Rajaji Hospital in Madurai. Even though treatment was given, the child died.

Representations were made demanding action against the doctors and paramedical staff. Information was sought under the provisions of the Right to Information Act. Since the efforts did not yield any response, the present petition was filed.

Justice G.R. Swaminathan observed that we have moved into the digital age. It should not be difficult to store information in the digital mode. A patient is entitled to be furnished with the relevant records pertaining to his or her treatment. This right can be effectuated only if the information is stored digitally.

The court observed that following the promulgation of the Right to Information Act, the government hospitals can no longer withhold information from patients or their attendants. Withholding would amount to professional misconduct and result in tortious liability as it constitutes an infringement of the patients’ rights.

The failure to furnish information by the authorities does constitute an infringement of the petitioner’s right. If the ventilator support had been available at Paramakudi, the petitioner need not have been forced to travel long distances to get admitted at Government Rajaji Hospital in Madurai. It is unfortunate that the ventilator support was not available at Paramakudi, the court observed and directed the State to pay a compensation of ₹75,000 to the woman in eight weeks.