A woman was advised termination of pregnancy after an ultrasound revealed a congenital anomaly in the fetus. The procedure was carried out at a private hospital, and she was discharged the same day. Days later, she returned with abdominal pain.
A second scan revealed retained fetal parts. She was referred to another hospital, where surgery was performed to remove the remnants. The damage to her uterus was significant, and she was told that future conception might not be possible.
The case reached the State Consumer Commission, which examined whether the termination had followed the legal and clinical requirements under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act. The Commission noted that the pregnancy was over 12 weeks, and therefore required the opinion of two registered medical practitioners. Only one had been involved.
The discharge summary did not mention any urgency or spontaneous abortion that would have justified bypassing the statutory requirement.
The defence argued that the patient was bleeding profusely and that immediate intervention was necessary. But the Commission found no documentation to support this claim. The discharge card made no mention of emergency status, and the operating notes did not reflect any life-threatening condition. The Commission concluded that the termination was elective, not emergent—and therefore subject to the full requirements of the MTP Act.
The court awarded compensation for the physical and emotional trauma, but the case leaves behind a sharper lesson. In high-stakes obstetric decisions, urgency must be documented, not assumed. And when the law requires a second opinion, it’s not a formality—it’s a safeguard. The absence of that safeguard, especially in a case with long-term reproductive consequences, is not just a procedural lapse. It’s a breach of duty.
Source : Order pronounced by Madhya Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 7th July, 2025.