Connect with us

Current Affairs

Surgeon gets one-year suspension for overdosing a patient and not sending her to ICU

Published

5 years ago

on

A surgeon in private practice, Dr Edward Foo Chee Boon, was suspended for a year after overdosing a patient and not sending her to intensive care when her condition worsened. 

The patient, who was admitted for surgery on 30 January 2012 to have her uterus, cervix, ovaries and fallopian tubes removed, died on 4 February that year under Dr Foo’s care. 

Following that, the surgeon was told that a complaint was made against him in 2014, but the hearing only started in 2018. 

During the hearing in 2018, an expert witness indicated that the patient was “a very small-size lady with a weight of 31.7kg on admission” and had a history of chronic diarrhea, adding that taking excessive doses of the medication she was given by Dr Foo could be fatal. 

Dr Foo was found guilty of three charges. The first charge was for poor note-taking, which he pleaded guilty to and was given a six months suspension. The second charge was for giving the patient an excessive dose of the solution to clear her bowels with six months suspension, while the third charge was for not sending the patient to intensive care with a one-year suspension.

Dr Foo contested the latter two charges. 

Based on the charges against Dr Foo, despite knowing or ought to know that the signs of clinical deterioration required the patient to be sent to for intensive monitoring in either the intensive care unit (ICU) or high-dependency unit (HDU), the surgeon refused to send the patient because of her financial situation. 

“Had the patient been sent to either the ICU or HDU for intensive monitoring on Feb 3, 2012, her condition could have been better managed and she could have received timely treatment such that her chances of survival could have been increased,” the charge against Dr Foo read. 

Another expert witness said Dr Foo failed to prioritize the patient’s safety and health and only concerned with her financial problems. 

“Such an irrelevant concern prevailed right from the beginning on admission till the time when the patient’s life was in grave danger,” the witness said. 

Due to the time taken by the Singapore Medical Council to settle the case, the penalty was reduced to a one-year suspension.

Furthermore, the tribunal had classified the harm done to the patient as “moderate” when considering the one-year suspension for the charge of not sending the patient to intensive care,  The Straits Times reported.

Background of the patient’s case

In January 2012, Dr Foo did a colonoscopy on the patient and found that she was suffering from a cancerous tumor. 

On 30 January 2012, the patient was admitted for surgery to remove her uterus, cervix, ovaries and fallopian tubes. Dr Foo had ordered four doses of a solution to clear her bowels. 

The manufacturers said a maximum of two doses of the solution should be given 10 to 12 hours apart. 

In The Straits Times report, it was highlighted that Dr Foo gave the first dose to the patient at 4.50 pm and the second at 6.30 pm. Two more doses were ordered at 8 am and 9 am the next day. However, he did not give her the fourth dose due to her complaining of chest pain after taking the third dose. 

The patient was also given potassium replacement for six hours when her potassium level was low during the kidney and liver function test.   

The surgery took place on 31 January 2012 at 7.45 pm. Two days later, the patient complained of pain in her upper abdomen. 

On 3 February 2012, the patient had a fever of 39.1 degrees Celsius, abnormally low blood pressure, a rapid heartbeat, decreasing oxygen saturation and shortness of breath. 

Tragically, the patient collapsed at 2.15 am the next day and died at 4.45 am. 

Dr Foo also involved in the liposuction death case in 2014

This isn’t the first of Dr Foo’s patients who had died. He also treated Mandy Yeong who died during a liposuction operation in 2013. 

The 44-year-old patient Mandy Yeong underwent liposuction operation on 28 June 2013 to remove fat from her abdomen to be used to smoothen the hollows in her thighs, The Straits Times reported. 

The two-hour operation ended at about 2 pm. At 2.54 pm, the clinic called for an ambulance when the patient began to feel unwell, coughed and collapsed. 

The State Coroner classified the death as misadventure, however, the family of Madam Mandy is pursuing a civil suit against the surgeon for negligence. 

The family’s lawyer Kuah Boon Theng filed against the doctor for neglecting the monitoring of the patient’s vitals – such as heart rate, blood pressure, and oxygen saturation levels, Asiaone reported. The lawyer also said that the surgeon may not have fully complied with procedural regulations. 

Netizens slammed Singapore’s law for giving Dr Foo only one-year suspension  

Following the death cases that linked to Dr Foo, netizens commented on the article shared by The Straits Times on Facebook,  slamming the tribunal for giving the surgeon only one year of suspension after he overdosed a patient. 

 

One commenter said the light punishment speaks the volume of the Hippocratic oath and unserved justice. 

Some commenters suggested the surgeon should be suspended permanently instead of only one year.

While others urged for his license to be revoked.  

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

2 days ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

23 September 2024

By

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending