Doctor’s responsibility between reality and law

The doctor’s responsibility between reality and the law

Medical errors committed by some doctors have spread recently, and in this regard, the law has been fair. It protectedthe doctor while performing his work, and also protected the patient from medical error, whether this was intentional or unintentional, and whether the error resulted from negligence or recklessness. There are cases in which the doctor is asked about, and other cases in which he is saved, and in some of these cases the rights of the victimized patients may be lost!

This is due to the fact that some doctors – as well as hospitals – legally vaccinate themselves before starting treatment. When a patient goes to the hospital, the administration forces him – he or his family – to sign a medical declaration before performing the operation. So that the doctor and the hospital are not responsible if complications occur, or any consequences that may occur!

First of all, there are conditions for permitting medical work, the first of which is that the doctor or surgeon must be licensed to practice the profession. The second condition: the patient’s consent, which is what I talked about in the previous paragraph. Despite the requirement of this approval, there are cases that require the doctor to intervene quickly. To save the patient without obtaining his consent if the delay results in serious harm to the patient.

The third condition is that the purpose of the medical treatment be to treat the patient, and if it is for another purpose, then the doctor is responsible, even if this is with the patient’s consent. But the question remains: When is the doctor responsible when a medical error occurs?

The doctor bears responsibility for medical error when he breaches the duties of caution – such as negligence – imposed on him by law. Before performing any surgical procedure, he must follow precautionary measures, such as sterilizing the operating room and conducting the necessary examinations for the patient before performing the surgical procedure. An example of this is that a court convicted a surgeon who negligently broke a patient’s leg while moving the operating table on which he was lying while anesthetized. Because this doctor did not notice that the leg was tied to the table, in addition to the fact that the leg had a certain disease that required it not to be moved.

The doctor who forgets some surgical tools in the patient’s stomach is also asked. We have seen many cases that resulted in the death of some patients as a result of forgetting a device or tool in their bodies.

The doctor is also asked when the disease worsens due to medical negligence. Here, the doctor is asked – despite obtaining the patient’s consent – to perform the surgical operation, not because of directing the medical work, but as a result of the medical error caused by medical negligence. There are also cases of medical error resulting from an increase in the amount of anesthesia during the surgical procedure, which can lead to the loss of many lives!

The doctor is also responsible if he is lazy to read the patients’ reports before performing the operation, as this results in many deaths, such as the doctor who injects the patient with a contaminated intravenous syringe, which results in anabscess, and like the doctor who treats a patient from a dog bite, then claims that he has been cured, but then it appears that he was supposed to He sends him to the dog hospital for treatment.

There are other forms of medical error, such as error in diagnosis, which is considered the most important stage. There are many disease cases that have worsened, and there are even cases that lead to death due to diagnostic errors. Because an error in diagnosis leads to an error in prescribing treatment.

And also refusing to treat a patient. A doctor who refuses to treat a patient in a remote place where no one else is, or who refrains from intervening in rescuing him when necessary – are all justifications for the doctor to be subject to the law, except for the patient to sign a statement stating that he refuses treatment.

The doctor is exempted from responsibility in cases of force majeure and circumstances beyond his control, which are the circumstances under which he is prohibited from providing assistance to the patient. The French judiciary did not accept the conviction of a doctor for removing a child from the hospital under the pretext of not having a care bed, as his mother could have treated him at home. On the other hand, the doctor who refrains from medical intervention despite being informed of the seriousness of the condition is condemned.

As for errors in treatment, the doctor is responsible for the treatment, not for the result. Although he may follow all the previous procedures, the patient may not recover or die, and in that case the doctor will not be asked, and his responsibility is limited to implementing the conditions of medical work, and when negligence, recklessness, or failure to exercise caution occurs, the responsibility inevitably falls on him.