The WMA urges physicians to act ethically and with appropriate respect for the health of the prospective mother and for the embryo from the beginning of life. To assist physicians in recognizing and following their ethical obligations, the WMA has promulgated this statement. From the ethical and scientific viewpoint, medical assistance in human reproduction is justified in all cases of infertility which do not respond to classical drug or surgical treatment with specific reference to: Immunological incompatibility, Irreversible obstacle to contact between male and female gametes, Infertility for unknown cause.
• In all these cases, the physician can only act with the full informed consent of donors and recipients.
• The physician must always act in the best interest of the child to be born of the procedure.
• It is the physician’s responsibility to provide the patients, at their own level of comprehension, with sufficient information about the purpose, methods, risks, inconveniences and disappointments of the procedure, and to obtain from the patients their informed consent to the procedure.
• As in any type of elective procedure, the physician must have adequate specialized training before undertaking the responsibility of performing the procedure.
• The physician must always comply with all applicable laws and regulations as well as the ethical requirements and the professional standards established by the National Medical Association and other appropriate medical organizations in the community. The patients are entitled to the same confidentiality and privacy as is required with any medical treatment.
When IVF techniques produce excess ova which will not be utilized for the immediate treatment of sterility, their use must be determined in agreement with the donors; excess ova can be:
• Destroyed
• Cryopreserved
• Fertilized and cryopreserved
(Adopted by the 39th World Medical Assembly Madrid, Spain, October 1987)
DMC order
Order DMC/DC/F.14/Comp.631/2010/ 12th April, 2010
The Delhi Medical Council examined a complaint of P K alleging professional misconduct/medical negligence on the part of JMH in the treatment administered to the complainant. The Council observes that the patient reported to JAH on 30th October, 2009 with complaint of Lt. Abdominal pain radiating to back, sweating and was found to have tachycardia and increased systolic blood pressure reading. In addition to differential diagnosis of renal colic, pain of cardiac origin was suspected. Patient was given ICU care and ECG and cardiac enzymes were investigated. Trop–T test was done to exclude cardiac (coronary) disease. As patient stayed in the hospital only for four hours and left against medical advise (LAMA), there is no question of medical negligence, otherwise it is presumed that the patient would have been further investigated and managed. Pain of renal origin and pain of cardiac original were differential diagnosis and patient was not neglected and investigated reasonably. In light of the above, prima facie, no case of medical negligence or professional misconduct is made out against the doctors.
No comments:
Post a Comment