judgment - Day after dental treatment - Probation sentence for anesthesiologist
After the death of a young patient who had requested a full anesthesia in a dentist practice in Hamburg's Altona district, the anesthesist was sentenced to a probationary prison term of one year and six months. The also accused dentist was acquitted. The anesthesist admitted to the charge of grievous bodily harm resulting in death, said the presiding judge. The judgment of the Regional Court is not yet legally binding.
The two doctors had treated an 18-year-old man on May 27, 2016. The young man had numerous broken teeth and severe pain, but immense fear of the treatment. He went with his mother to a dentist practice and requested a full anesthesia for the treatment. He rejected suggestions for alternative treatment methods. During the multiple-hour appointment, cardiac-circulatory failure occurred. Shortly thereafter, the man died in a hospital.
According to the court's conviction, the 67-year-old anesthesist did not have all the necessary equipment for the more than eight-hour long treatment. He had not informed the patient and his mother about this deviation from the standard, said the presiding judge. They would have certainly not consented, he emphasized. The dentist was not at fault. The 46-year-old could rely on the fact that the experienced colleague, the anesthesist, would bring the correct equipment.
At the start of the trial on April 4, both doctors expressed deep regret over the patient's death. The anesthesist admitted errors. The dentist believed she had fulfilled her duty of care.
The patient's mother was present during the treatment, as she accompanied him to the dentist's practice. The absence of necessary equipment during the general anesthesia procedure led to a penalty for the anesthesist, resulting in a probation sentence. The patient's health had significantly deteriorated, ultimately leading to Tod. The medical judgments and court process in Hamburg were carefully considered to arrive at these conclusions. The dentist, who relied on the anesthesist's expertise, was not found guilty of any wrongdoing in the case of bodily harm.
