INLSA

MF party leader Amichand Rajbansi.

The family of Amichand Rajbansi is desperate to find out why he died after being fitted with a pacemaker, and feels that his cardiologist has been reluctant to open the former politician’s files, even when he was alive.

But specialist YT Singh’s lawyer says his client has nothing to hide and Rajbansi’s medical records had been couriered to his family’s attorney, Sundeep Singh, on February 15.

“These claims are bizarre,” said Altus van Rensburg of Macrobert Attorneys.

“We had a request from (Sundeep) Singh to make the records available within a 30-day period. We sent them to him well within that time. I personally signed off the bundle of documents. The family is entitled to the files and my client has no reason to withhold them.”

He said the doctor, who is out of the country, had treated Rajbansi for more than 17 years and there were “piles and piles” of records.

“In fact, we will give them our fullest co-operation. If they need anything else, they must contact my offices.”

Last month Rajbansi’s daughter, Vimlesh, lodged a complaint with the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA) regarding her father’s death. Van Rensburg said they were unaware of this.

“This is news to us. Neither the doctor nor my offices has received any letter from the HPCSA informing us of the complaint.”

Sundeep Singh denied he had received the medical records. He said that their letter had been the first step in a legal process in which the family first had to ask the doctor for the files. Failing this, they would have to seek a court order.

He said that if the files had indeed been sent, then protocol would have been breached.

“He cannot disclose these records without the patient’s consent. I can confirm that none of Mr Rajbansi’s medical records was sent to me.”

HPCSA acting registrar and chief executive, Dr Kgosi Letlape, said they had already requested an explanation for the complaint from the practitioner concerned.

“As per our legal processes, once a complaint is received, a written explanation is requested from the practitioner. The health care professional may refuse or be advised not to provide an explanation, as it may be used as evidence later.”

If the explanation was submitted, it, together with the letter of complaint, would be referred to the professional board concerned for consideration, Letlape said.

“Should the board decide that there are grounds for complaint, a professional conduct committee will hold an... inquiry, during which oral evidence is presented, often including independent, expert witnesses.”

Letlape said according to the HPCSA’s guidelines, a health-care professional was obliged to make available information to a third party, without the written consent of the patient or their legal representative, only when it is ordered by the court.

Vimlesh Rajbansi claimed in September last year her father was fitted with a pacemaker on the advice of his cardiologist.

In October, her father fell ill and was re-admitted with severe bronchitis. After several weeks in the intensive care unit, his condition improved and he was transferred to a general ward. But he took a turn for the worse and was taken back to the ICU where he eventually died after contracting an infection.

Rajbansi said several requests had been made to the cardiologist for access to her father’s medical files, to no avail.

“When I contacted the doctor, I was referred to his attorney. I made the same request to him, but it seems like we are being ignored. What does he have to hide? We are really frustrated. In fact, even when my dad took a turn for the worse in December last year, we sought a second opinion. Even then, the same cardiologist refused to let the other doctor look at his file.

“He said the doctor should just speak to him directly. He has even refused to meet us in person. He is just avoiding us at every turn and this is making us more and more suspicious.”

She alleged further investigations since her father’s death had revealed that he was not a suitable candidate for a pacemaker.

She claimed her father had been told the device would give him a new lease of life.

“There were certain criteria that needed to be met before the medical aid approved the R200 000 device. My father did not meet that criteria. It is a mystery how the pre-authorisation for the device was obtained.”

She told the Daily News the Raj-bansi family, including his widow, Shameen, would not rest until the truth was revealed about what caused her father’s death.

“We are taking this so seriously because we do not want another family to experience our grief. Nothing will bring my father back. But, at least it will give us some closure to know what caused his death.

“He had been consulting this cardiologist for years. In fact they were friends. He owes it to us to tell us what went wrong.”

Shameen could not be reached for comment.

yogas.nair@inl.co.za