If infected blood is transfused, can the physician be held guilty?

At the time of blood transfusion, if a child gets HIV due to infected blood, what is the liability of the physician transfusing the blood of being charged by the law especially if the blood was brought from an authorised blood bank run by other doctor?


If it can be proved that the infection is due to a particular blood transfusion, then there is a degree of liability involved. If the doctor who gave the transfusion exercised due care then they may not have any liability. The blood bank may be the ultimate culprit in your example but you must remember that blood from a recently infected person will test negative and yet be highly infectious. Proving legal liability is possible but difficult.