In a landmark ruling that would chasten private hospitals and nursing homes that are often accused of inflating bills, the Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that doctors cannot perform additional procedures during a scheduled operation without the patient's prior consent, except in cases where a life is in danger. Do you think that this ruling will be effective?
Lionking says: yes this is a very good judgement ... patients and their families have the right to know the procedures that are being adopted by the doctors ... and pre-intimation and taking the patients consent is the way to go ...
LP53 says: Yes, a precedent has been set. Effective? It is in our hands, the patients and their relatives, if we want to demand our rights.
Niceguy251 says: It is because of some unethical doctors that this judgement was necessiated. Patient and relatives must know before the operation if there is likelihood of any complication needing further surgery or procedure and affect of that on cost. It is possible for doctors to indicate that.
vIRTUALsCORPIO says: If Doctors had been truely faithful 2 the oath they take, this wud not have been necessary. Anything that can bring fairness is welcome
Busbyee says: yes, effective with an educated patient. unless ofcourse, the concerned operation is not being done to steal a kidney or two..
Savy says: it is a very good decision...especially so for eg in cases of angioplasty..when the patient is having angiography and the procedure is halfway through..normal practice for the docs is to take the inference of the test to the relatives and usually a go through signal is wrested.relatives usually cow down listen to the extent of blockages and the hapless patient is totally oblivious...many a times it is not recquired also.This ws just one example..results are inflated bills and avoidable invasion of the patient's body.
Ruggedboyz says: i hope this law brings in fairness into the business of medical procedure and relieves people of the bizzare billing that hapless people are mainly subjected to giving where the admin get away giving technical jargons which they have no clue of, also should help people in drawing the medicos to court when in doubt and live in peace ta ta
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
yes this is a very good judgement ... patients and their families have the right to know the procedures that are being adopted by the doctors ... and pre-intimation and taking the patients consent is the way to go ...
Yes, a precedent has been set. Effective? It is in our hands, the patients and their relatives, if we want to demand our rights.
It is because of some unethical doctors that this judgement was necessiated. Patient and relatives must know before the operation if there is likelihood of any complication needing further surgery or procedure and affect of that on cost. It is possible for doctors to indicate that.
If Doctors had been truely faithful 2 the oath they take, this wud not have been necessary.
Anything that can bring fairness is welcome
yes, effective with an educated patient. unless ofcourse, the concerned operation is not being done to steal a kidney or two..
it is a very good decision...especially so for eg in cases of angioplasty..when the patient is having angiography and the procedure is halfway through..normal practice for the docs is to take the inference of the test to the relatives and usually a go through signal is wrested.relatives usually cow down listen to the extent of blockages and the hapless patient is totally oblivious...many a times it is not recquired also.This ws just one example..results are inflated bills and avoidable invasion of the patient's body.
i hope this law brings in fairness into the business of medical procedure and relieves people of the bizzare billing that hapless people are mainly subjected to giving where the admin get away giving technical jargons which they have no clue of, also should help people in drawing the medicos to court when in doubt and live in peace ta ta
Post a Comment