Sunday Times 2
Police Hospital accused of negligence
View(s):Letter to the Editor
This is a reply to the article, “Negative publicity cannot overshadow Police Hospital’s yeoman service” by Anton Jeyanathan
The death of much respected Retired Senior DIG Leo Perera due to criminal negligence and the near death encounter of equally renowned retired Senior DIG Edward Gunawardene due negligence of a callous and indifferent nature, has received publicity in recent times. Such publicity has been an inevitable consequence of the avoidable death of Leo Perera. We reliably understand that the CID, in their inquiry concerning criminal negligence giving rise to Leo Perera’s death, have already observed a number of areas of medical negligence.
The Police Hospital in Narahenpita at the centre of controversy.
Some areas of negligence are so obvious that any layperson can understand their magnitude. Delaying the administration of intravenous antibiotics to a serious ‘septicaemia’ patient by nine hours, failing to transfer him to the ICU for closer monitoring, the consultant physician not seeing the patient till death, the Chief Medical Officer failing to order an autopsy, and the physician giving the cause of death without seeing the patient at all, are areas from which any person can draw the conclusion that criminal negligence has contributed to the death of Leo Perera.
The CID inquiry, followed by a discreet survey undertaken by police headquarters at the police hospital manifestly identifies the reasons contributing to the death of Leo Perera, as well as the dangers which yet prevail to lives of serious patients warded in the hospital. Foremost amongst these reasons is the chronic practice of medical officers leaving the hospital daily at about 1.30 p.m., leaving only two junior doctors taking turns being available to handle emergency cases in the wards and the rooms. The Chief Medical Officer has failed to establish and ensure a system where it is mandatory for the two physicians to be summoned to the hospital in emergencies. After all, they are offered official cars, drivers and over 250 litres of fuel to be available to the hospital when necessary. To compound matters, a second or third line of experienced doctors are not being posted outside normal hours, as is the case in all other hospitals. So long as this defective arrangement prevails, warded serious patients will continue to run the risk of danger to life.
Amidst such a multitude of findings in addition to the death of Leo Perera and the near death experience of Edward Gunawardene, Anton Jeyanathan prefers to believe that the police hospital is providing a yeoman service! It is baffling to understand how he can chose to ignore the obvious and live in a world of ‘make believe’. It is still more unfortunate that Jeyanathan, a retired police officer and a member of the National Police Commission, prefers to be concerned only about the ongoing CID inquiry leading to ‘despondency’ amongst the medical staff in the hospital. The question that begs an answer is what action he would propose in respect of the complaint made by late Leo Perera’s son that medical negligence contributed to death. Does he imply that the complaint should not be investigated in order to prevent ‘despondency’ affecting the hospital! As a member of the NPC, should he not have considered that ‘justice can be done’ only by an investigation into the circumstances that led to the death of his highly respected colleague, and not by its suppression.
Jeyanathan has stated that police reservist doctors are not police officers, but civilians. They all hold police ranks, are mobilised and therefore are active police officers, as in the case of mobilised volunteer officers of the three armed services. It is surprising that Jeyanathan, a retired senior police officer and a member of the National Police Commission is ignorant of such a simple fact. What Avanthi Perera, Senior State Counsel has meant by the excerpts quoted in Jeyanathan’s article is merely that only those in certain socio-economic classes have the benefit and opportunity to bring to light cases of medical negligence and insist on proper inquiries, but not lesser mortals. Jeyanathan has misinterpreted Avanthi Perera. The excerpts quoted cannot be used in any form to show that there was no negligence leading to the death of Leo Perera. Even his reference to “one swallow does not make a summer” without comprehension of the English epithet, is another non sequitur in his arguments. Does Jeyanathan imply that conducting the inquiry into criminal negligence causing the death of Leo Perera is beneficial, but that it alone cannot erase the ‘darkness’ enveloping the hospital? He has surely agreed with us that the hospital is in ‘darkness’, but we certainly do not agree that one inquiry only will be futile. We believe that this inquiry will expose a can of worms; it has already highlighted a few of the serious shortcomings.
All of us including Jeyanathan should be conscious that the fate of unfortunate Leo Perera can befall any of us unless the hospital is completely revamped, with changes at the level of the Chief Medical Officer and the two physicians. If not, the hospital will decline further, accentuating danger to life. Using the very excerpts by Avanthi Perera misquoted out of context by Jeyanathan, it may not be erroneous to draw the conclusion that lesser mortals like police sergeants and constables may also have died like Leo Perera, without opportunities for their families to register complaints.
It is therefore a matter for conjecture as to why with all the drawbacks of the hospital staring in the face and the knowledge that Leo Perera had died due to medical negligence, Jeyanathan, a comrade and colleague of Leo Perera, had chosen to rise in defence of the senior medical officers who had contributed to the death of Leo Perera by their criminal negligence, and also reduced the hospital to its current pathetic state. This appears a case of a gross betrayal of a comrade.
Rohan Perera, the son of late Leo Perera had requested the National Police Commission conduct an independent inquiry. None of us has heard from them since. It would be of interest to know what initiative Jeyanathan, as a member of the Commission, has exercised, to request a proper inquiry. Now that we have seen his article in defence of those who have contributed to the death of the late Leo Perera and caused the decline of standards in the hospital, are we not wrong in the presumption that he has not exercised any initiative to request the Commission to invite Rohan Perera for a discussion, as a prelude towards requesting a proper inquiry. Fortunately the IGP filled the breach. By the attitude and bias displayed, Jeyanathan has compromised the sacred principles of the Police Commission.
In the meantime it is learnt that the Goverment Medical Officers Association (GMOA) is exerting pressure on the IGP to withhold the CID investigation and refer the matter to the Medical Department. This is a criminal offence and it would be a travesty of justice if it is not investigated accordingly. – -The Association of Chiefs of Police [ACP]. Its members are also members of the Retired Senior Police Officers Association [RSPOA](Members of the ACP are retired IGPs, Senior DIGs and DIGs)