Chennai: Following the tragic incidents of pregnant women being given HIV transfused blood in Virudhunagar and Chennai, here is another medical negligence case.
Ajitha, a resident of Old Washermanpet, who had undergone a C-section in 2012, was found to have a sanitary napkin in her abdomen months after the surgery.
It was her second child and she was advised of Caesarean section at a private hospital in the vicinity.
“The surgery was performed 24 February by the present Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital Dean, Dr P Vasanthamani, who was then a surgeon at RSRM Hospital and a part-timer at the private hospital,” said her husband Mahesh.
“Since then, Ajitha had been suffering from severe abdominal pain and we consulted another private hospital. The doctors advised us to take a CT scan that revealed the presence of a sanitary pad. The medical experts did the surgery and removed the cotton ball. For further treatment, we went to a private multi-specialty hospital and shelled out more than Rs 12 lakh,” said Mahesh.
Soon after the detection of a foreign body in Ajitha’s body, the couple had filed an FIR with the local police station. Subsequently, they had approached Medical Council of India (MCI), and recently filed a case with the Commissioner of Police against Dr Vasanthamani.
“At present, three cases against the doctor is happening – Madras High Court, Consumer Court in Pookadai and the police station in Beach jurisdiction is also investigating,” said Mahesh.
Mahesh questions how the MCI appointed the doctor as dean of a government hospital. It was said the case had been adjourned 20 times, but Mahesh stated that the case is still pending and the hearing in the consumer court is scheduled for March.
Dr Vasanthamani told News Today, “I have concrete evidence to prove that I’m not at fault. After the surgery, the couple had claimed of Rs 1 crore as compensation. Since I did not commit any mistake, I refused to pay and the legal proceedings are going on.”
“The CT scan reports suggested ‘a coin-like shadow’ as their finding and did not state the presence of a sanitary pad,” she added.
The doctor further raises the question on the requirement for a sanitary pad during a surgery. It is learnt that the magistrate directed to mediate and settle the case with the victim. However, as the doctor says as she has valid claims proving her stance, the case is still waiting to be heard and given a ruling.