Supreme Court Dismisses Directions to Mandate Doctors to Specify Side Effects

To outline the side effects of medicines, citing the World Health Organization's findings that a significant portion of harm to patients
There are some innocuous medicines, but some have serious side effects (Representational Image: Unsplash)
There are some innocuous medicines, but some have serious side effects (Representational Image: Unsplash)
Published on

The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a plea seeking to make it mandatory for doctors to disclose all potential risks and side effects of prescribed medications to patients. This decision was made by a bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, who deemed the proposal impractical.

Key Points:

  • The Plea: sought to mandate doctors to disclose potential risks and side effects of prescribed medications

  • The Court's Decision: deemed the proposal impractical

  • Alternative Solution: proposed display of boards in pharmacies advising patients to read medicine labels carefully

  • Reasoning: concerns about feasibility and crowded pharmacies

This decision was made by a bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan (Representational Image: Unsplash)
This decision was made by a bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan (Representational Image: Unsplash)

The petitioner, represented by Advocate Prashant Bhushan, argued that informed consent from patients requires disclosure of contraindications and potential adverse effects of treatments. Bhushan suggested that doctors could use printed proformas to outline the side effects of medicines, citing the World Health Organization's findings that a significant portion of harm to patients results from adverse drug reactions. "As it is, doctors are unhappy about their being brought under Consumer Protection Act." the judge said.

Alternative solutions that do not unduly burden healthcare professional (Representational Image: Unsplash)
Alternative solutions that do not unduly burden healthcare professional (Representational Image: Unsplash)

The court's decision emphasized  the challenges in balancing patient informed consent with the practical realities of healthcare delivery. While the petitioner's intention was to promote transparency and patient safety, the court's ruling emphasizes the need for alternative solutions that do not unduly burden healthcare professional.

There are some innocuous medicines, but some have serious side effects, just a printed thing should be given, because patient only looks at what the doctor tells him. He doesn't look at the pharmacist.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan

However, the bench expressed concerns about the feasibility of this proposal. Justice Gavai noted that general practitioners would be unable to attend to more than 10-15 patients if required to provide detailed information on potential risks, given the crowded nature of pharmacies. Justice Viswanathan proposed an alternative solution, suggesting that pharmacies display boards in local languages advising patients to read medicine labels carefully.

Reference:

1. Drugs Control Platform (Retrieved From: https://drugscontrol.org)

(Input From Various Sources)

(Rehash/Neha Kamble/MSM)

There are some innocuous medicines, but some have serious side effects (Representational Image: Unsplash)
‘I Feel Dismissed’: People Experiencing Colorism Say Health System Fails Them
logo
Medbound
www.medboundtimes.com