[ad_1]
The woman appeared in court asking for an order from the Klaipeda University Hospital 100 thousand. moral damage. This case was heard in the Courts of Appeal of Klaipėda Regional and Lithuania.
Both courts have confirmed that the guilt of the doctors in the operation carried out is not apparent from the evidence collected. It is true that the claim for non-material damage was granted in part. The father, who lost his father, was sentenced to 10,000 in hospital. euros.
It was found that doctors did not warn the patient before surgery about the potential risks. It appears that he was deprived of the right to choose an alternative method of treatment. It was for this reason that he led the daughter to be sentenced to 10,000. moral damage.
Verdict after 5 years
Oksana’s father was admitted to the hospital in 2015. December 21 She arrived at Klaipeda University Hospital with a scheduled referral for rheumatism treatment. The man was treated at this hospital until 2016. January 3.
During treatment, 2015 On December 31, at 9 am, he underwent fibrocolonoscopy and intestinal damage. As a result, the patient in 2016. January 3 died. Before this study, the man confirmed his consent for the colonoscopy.
It is true that the patient was not informed about the possible complication of the colonoscopy examination: perforation. The physician who performed the fibrocolonoscopy did not record the course of the examination and there are no records of it in the medical record.
The father, who lost his father, initially went to the hospital to find out if his father had received proper medical care. It was explained that the patient was receiving treatment in a timely and adequate manner, but it was negative that the cause of death was a complication derived from the surgery performed.
The woman then submitted an application to the Patient Health Injury Commission with a statement on the amount of the damage. It stated that no damages had been caused and did not admit the claimant’s claim for damages of € 100,000. EUR amount.
The Commission’s decision is based on the fact that the medical services were provided to the woman’s father with the utmost care, diligence, attention and precaution. Oksana did not agree with such a decision and therefore went to court.
Lived in the United States
Oksana told the court that the amount of damage caused is 100,000. EUR, because his father died suddenly due to the wrong actions of the hospital doctors, that is, the wrong treatment. The woman, who died suddenly after her father, has suffered and continues to experience great psychological shock.
He lived in another country during his father’s hospitalization in the US, and when his health deteriorated, he urgently moved from the US to Lithuania, communicated by phone throughout his hospitalization and spoke about well-being and the state of his father’s health, he offered tests and treatment.
As a result of her father’s sudden death, in the absence of any life-threatening illness, she died of shock from study complications, severe mental shock, she was unable to overcome her physical and spiritual pain, and her spiritual experiences were and they are very good because it was very close. with her parents, and now she also has to support her lonely mother.
She often has to travel from the United States to Lithuania, visit a psychologist, and take medication for depression. By making such arguments, the woman requested compensation for the non-pecuniary damage she was seeking.
Court representatives stressed that they see the doctors’ guilt in the episode where they failed to comply with their duty to inform the patient of the violation. The court determined that in the specific case, the patient was not provided with complete and detailed information about the health care services provided, possible alternatives, complications, so the patient was unaware of the risks of the treatment and procedure and could not avoid it by refusing the service.
Therefore, the responsibility for restricting the choice rests with the medical institution. Such illegal actions by the hospital (violation of the patient’s right to information about the colonoscopy performed) are partly related to the causal link with the consequences, that is, the death of the patient.
[ad_2]
