In healthcare, trust is foundational because patients submit themselves to the care of medical professionals with the expectation that competence, diligence, and transparency will guide every decision. But when that expectation is allegedly unmet, dire consequences may follow.
A recent action before the High Court of Justice, Accra, is premised on this issue. A Ghanaian has commenced a medical negligence suit against a private hospital, seeking damages of GH¢4 million for what she describes as a series of grave lapses in her care.
The Claim
The plaintiff, a social worker and communications specialist, alleges that the defendant hospital and its agents breached the duty of care owed to her during the course of her treatment.
According to her statement of claim, she presented in August 2024 with chest pain and shortness of breath. Following initial consultations and referrals, she was admitted to the defendant hospital, where she was diagnosed with conditions including thoracic endometriosis and pneumothorax.
What followed, she contends, was not recovery, but a cascade of medical failures.
Allegations of Surgical Negligence
At the centre of the dispute are two surgical interventions undertaken to manage her condition.
The plaintiff alleges that the first procedure, which involved the insertion of a tube to drain air and fluid from her lungs, was improperly performed and ultimately unsuccessful. A second surgery was then conducted under urgent circumstances, but this too allegedly failed.
Subsequent medical review, she claims, revealed that the tube had been incorrectly positioned, that it was inserted at the wrong anatomical location, and therefore ineffective.
Of particular concern is her assertion that she was initially informed that the procedures had been successful, only to later discover, through a specialist consultation, that both had failed. This concern raises a critical issue in medical negligence law as to whether the duty of care extends beyond treatment to include full and accurate disclosure to the patient.
Delay, Disclosure, and Deterioration
The plaintiff further alleges a pattern of systemic lapses during her admission. These include delays in discharge despite medical clearance, failure to act promptly on a recommendation for referral to the Cardiothoracic Centre at Korle-Bu, and inadequate post-operative care.
She also contends that the hospital failed to adhere to her disclosed dietary restrictions, resulting in allergic reactions during her stay.
Taken together, these allegations suggest far more than mere isolated acts of negligence, but impute a broader failure in the standard of care expected of a medical institution.
The consequences, as pleaded by the plaintiff, have been significant. She claims to have suffered persistent pain, reduced mobility, diminished capacity to work, and ongoing medical complications requiring treatment abroad.
The Legal Framework: Duty, Breach, and Damage
Under Ghanaian tort law, liability in negligence is established upon proof of three essential elements: duty of care, breach of that duty, and resulting damage.
There is little doubt that a hospital owes its patients a duty of care. The central question in this case will be whether the defendant’s conduct fell below the standard of a reasonably competent medical service provider, and whether that breach caused the injuries complained of.
Interestingly, the plaintiff also invokes the National Health Policy (2020) and Ghana’s commitments under Sustainable Development Goal 3 on Good Health and Well-Being, though these may not be directly enforceable as causes of action in Ghana.
Damages and the Question of Deterrence
The plaintiff seeks general damages assessed at GH¢4 million, alongside costs. She also urges the court to impose damages that serve a deterrent function.
Her claim encompasses not only physical injury, but also loss of professional capacity, financial strain, particularly in relation to overseas treatment, and ongoing psychological distress.
A Case to Watch
This suit is likely to attract considerable attention, both for the quantum of damages claimed and the seriousness of the allegations made.
Should the claims be substantiated, the case may have wider implications for medical institutions, especially, regarding clinical accountability, patient communication, and institutional liability. It also underscores the increasing willingness of patients to challenge perceived failures in medical care through the courts.
As the proceedings unfold before the High Court, the outcome will not only determine liability in this instance, but may also contribute to shaping the contours of medical negligence law in Ghana.
