Indian-Origin Man In Australia Sues Hospital Claiming Wife's C-Section Caused Him "Psychotic Illness"

An Indian-origin man in Australia has sued a hospital for $1 billion (approximately Rs 5,000 crore) over claims that he developed a "psychotic illness" as a result of watching his wife give birth via C-section, or Cesarean-section. According to The Independent, the man, identified as Anil Koppula, filed the lawsuit against the Royal Women's Hospital, where his wife gave birth in January 2018. In his suit, he alleged that he was "encouraged" or "permitted" by the Melbourne hospital to observe the surgical birthing process, and that, seeing his wife's internal organs and blood caused the onset of a "psychotic illness". 

"Mr Koppula alleges that he was encouraged, or permitted, to observe the delivery, that in the course of doing so, he saw his wife's internal organs and blood...He says that the Hospital breached a duty of care it owed to him and is liable to pay him damages," the document read, as per the outlet. 

Mr Koppula's lawsuit seeks damages from the Royal Women's Hospital in the amount of 1 billion Australian dollars. During the court proceedings, he said that in addition to causing "psychotic illness", watching the C-section had led to the "breakdown of his marriage". 

Also Read | US Women Arrested For Tossing Baby Around "Like A Toy" Outside Florida Bar

Notably, Mr Koppula had witnessed his child's birth via C-section in January 2018. Caesarean sections are performed in some circumstances when healthcare providers believe it is safer for the mother and/or baby. It is the surgical delivery of a baby through an incision made in the mother's abdomen and uterus. 

According to the New York Post, on Monday, the Supreme Court in Victoria dismissed Mr Koppula's claim, terming it an "abuse of process". The hospital said that it hadn't breached a "duty of care", and Mr Koppula didn't suffer any real injury because of the operation he observed. 

The Australian judge reportedly determined that Mr Koppula is owed no damages because he did not suffer any economic loss and his alleged illness does not meet the threshhold for what is considered a "serious injury".