A bulk pharmacy in Brasilia has been ordered to compensate a family after it incorrectly delivered a medication that harmed the safety and health of a child under 6 years old. She was ordered to pay compensation of R$30,000, R$15,000 to the child, and R$7,500 to each parent.
The decision was issued by the 7th Civil Court of Brasilia of the Court of Justice of the Federal District and Territories (TJDFT), which recognized the failure to provide the service. According to this process, the parents ordered vitamin B12 for their son, but received atomoxetine, a drug intended to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and intended only for patients over 6 years of age.
During this process, the family pediatrician attested to the danger of incorrect use of the drug, confirmed the contraindications and that the dose administered was five times higher than that recommended for use in children.
The minor exhibited severe and alarming symptoms, such as complete loss of appetite, weight loss, refusal to drink fluids, dehydration, irritability, insomnia and sleep disturbances, requiring medical monitoring.
After three days of using the medication, the pharmacy informed the child’s mother that the medication had been changed. However, this did not prevent the appearance of the previously mentioned symptoms, which continued in the following weeks even after stopping taking the medication.
In the decision, the judge stressed that “there is no doubt about the failure of the services” and that the exchange of letters between officials and the defendant “indicates the acknowledgment of the error and the concern expressed by the institution.”
He stated in the sentence that “the situation we witnessed goes beyond a mere daily inconvenience, and constitutes a violation of human dignity and personality rights, especially the health and physical integrity of the child, which are values protected by the Federal Constitution.”
Hence, the defendant was awarded a total compensation of R$ 30,000 to the family as compensation for moral damages. There is still an appeal against the ruling.
the Capitals I contacted the company, but had not received any response at the time of publishing this report. It remains open for updates.
About The Author
