[Speaker 1] Supposing if a patient with a fracture patient, a routine fracture patient gets infected and he's requiring a second surgery and maybe a third surgery, two or three procedures. And patient is not willing for the second surgery and because of that, the complication just keeps on increasing without his knowledge. Because then what happens? What is the stages that basically where we can save our liability? Say patient became infected on 15th day and then I advised him surgery. He said, "No, I don't want to go for second surgery, I'm going." It will heal on its own, he's thinking. You give me medicine. And I gave him medicine. So what is the procedure which I should follow that he is not following my advice, which I think you earlier told that I should take signature that he's not willing for surgery. But what is my liability now he has got infected and I know that if he does not go for second surgery, he's definitely going to be in a lot of trouble.
[Speaker 2] See liability definitely is going to be there, but can be well defended in court of law. And defense can only be done by documentation. You rightly said that you need to take a refusal consent. Or if at all patient has refusing to go for your advice, that will definitely will be termed as a contributory negligence on the part of a patient, which they have not followed your advice. So you need to take a documentation, make a documentation whatever you have already communicated to the patient so that you have got a good defense. But infection per se, multiple judgement has already came in the country. If at all we can defend that we have taken every care in OT also or in hospital also for disinfectant, we have got a record of regularly fumigating the OT or hospital or whatever per se. Then we can definitely defend ourselves that every care has been given to the patient. In spite of that infection could have been offered earlier in accident or continued carried away or because infection post infection further treatment was required as a due care which was refused by the patient. In such defenses doctor and hospital can be safeguarded. Otherwise in any infection people are now rushing to the court. It's my personal experience and they're getting a result in their favour because documents are not good.