The commission noted noted that the woman’s informed consent was not taken for performing the said colonoscopy procedure, instead her daughter's consent was taken. (AI-generated image)A Kerala consumer commission has held a hospital, its medical superintendent and one doctor liable for medical negligence after finding that an elective colonoscopy was performed on a woman in 2011 without obtaining her informed consent, following which her colon was perforated, necessitating emergency surgery. President C T Sabu, along with members Sreeja S and Ram Mohan R, directed them to refund Rs 28,790 towards the colonoscopy and corrective surgery, and pay Rs 75,000 as compensation for pain and suffering while hearing the complaint of a woman who approached the Mother Hospital following a history of abdominal discomfort. “The colonoscopy having been performed without obtaining the informed consent of the complainant, without adequate pre-procedure assessment and in a breach of the duty of care, the amount collected towards the said procedure cannot be permitted to be retained by the opposite parties (hospital and two doctors) concerned,” the June 29 order read. A doctor visit, emergency procedureThe woman claimed that she had been experiencing abdominal discomfort and loose stools for nearly two months when she consulted a doctor at the said hospital in February 2011. Blood and stool tests suggested by the doctor were reportedly within normal limits, but without first exploring any non-invasive diagnostic procedure, she was advised to undergo a colonoscopy.Also Read | ‘Premium’ liquor bottle ‘shatters’ in transit, airline passenger wins Rs 55,000 payoutAccording to her, she was admitted to the hospital on March 9, 2011, where the colonoscopy was performed without obtaining her informed consent. A few hours later, her daughter was informed that the procedure had been abandoned because of a blockage. The woman alleged that despite experiencing severe pain, she was not permitted to meet or speak to her daughter for several hours.The complaint stated that the next day, doctors informed the family that a perforation had occurred during the colonoscopy and that an emergency laparotomy was required to repair it. She remained hospitalised for nine days following the surgery. The woman was represented by advocate T B Mini.‘Patient not informed of risks’The commission noted that the woman’s informed consent was not taken for performing the said colonoscopy procedure, but consent from her daughter was taken for the same, and the doctors failed to obtain an adequate medical history and did not perform an informed assessment of the patient’s individual risk factors before proceeding with the procedure. Story continues below this ad“The patient/complainant was not informed of the potential risks associated with the colonoscopy, including the risk of bowel perforation and any patient – specific risk factors,” it added.Noting that the colonoscopy procedure notes were “cryptic” and lacked essential details, the commission clarified that in medical jurisprudence, proper documentation is an integral part of standard care. “Inadequate records justify an adverse inference that either proper care was not exercised or proper justification is not available,” the commission added. Holding the hospital, its Medical Superintendent and the treating doctor jointly liable, the commission directed them to refund Rs 28,790 collected towards the colonoscopy and the emergency laparotomy that became necessary because of the perforation. It also awarded Rs 50,000 as compensation for the pain, suffering, mental agony and hardship caused by the negligence.The commission noted that the woman only sought Rs 2,500 for the litigation cost but enhance dit Rs 25,000, noting that the complaint has remained pending for more than 14 years before its final order.Story continues below this adHospital’s defenceRepresenting the hospital’s director, advocates K Madhavan and Rajeev O V submitted that the hospital had made the complainant as well as her bystanders aware of the treatment provided and argued that the woman is not entitled to any compensation. The doctor concerned also claimed to have explained the pros and cons of the colonoscopy procedure, its potential complications like bleeding, colonic perforation, and the possible need for laparotomy, etc., to the complainant and her bystanders. Significance of ruling This ruling highlights that a hospital and its doctors cannot go ahead with a procedure without getting informed consent from the patient themselves and can be liable for medical negligence.For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and Union territories (Kerala: 1800-425-1550) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express (Digital), where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More Tags:consumer courtsConsumer dispute Redressal Commission