He is obliged to pay half a million euros Venizelio Hospital of Heraklion to the family of 4-year-old Melina Paraskaki, who died in the early hours of December 29, 2015 after an operation for “meatballs”.

The Three-member Administrative Court of First Instance of Heraklion, with a decision he issued a few days ago on the much-lauded case, it is decided that errors and omissions of the hospital’s organs are causally linked to the death of the 4-year-old Melina and therefore the relevant compensatory liability is established for the restoration of the mental suffering suffered by close relatives of the unfortunate child.

This development, which undoubtedly constitutes a form of justification for the parents of the 4-year-old – the first substantial justification for this Golgotha ​​of 7.5 years – is becoming known a few days after the Supreme Court accepted the appeal of the competent prosecutor, giving a “green light” for the trial of the criminal part of the case at the Court of Appeal, which is expected to happen very soon.

The court thoroughly analyzes the rationale of the multi-page decision, which it reached based on the one hand on all the evidentiary material of the case file (including the medical opinions), on the other hand taking into account the acquittal decision of the First Tripartite Court of Misdemeanors of Heraklion, with the anesthesiologist as the defendant.

The judges of the Three-member Administrative Court of First Instance of Heraklion, as demonstrated by their decision, consider that specific acts as well as omissions led to the death of the unfortunate child.

-First of all, in relation to the critical issue of the allergic reaction that prevailed in the criminal court of first instance, the Administrative Court of First Instance considers that this version was not substantiated by any formal finding. “However the possibility of an allergic reaction was not established by any standard finding to document it” it states at one point. He does not rule it out, but he does not treat it as a given either.

In summary, the decision points out that there were no cutaneous signs of anaphylaxisthere were no microscopic post-mortem findings of allergy, while the hypothesis of the acute dysfunction of the left ventricle of the heart that the 4-year-old showed as a consequence of a direct attack of the myocardium in an allergy, does not seem-supported-probable and the relevant explanation is listed.

-Special mention is also made of the fact that at the critical time, there was no nebulizer available. “In view of the fact that postoperative bronchospasm in children receiving anesthesia for ENT operations is a frequent complication, the defendant hospital’s institutions should have demonstrated increased preparation and readiness on the part of the certified anesthesiologists, so that they are able to deal directly and in time even life-threatening situations with the administration of salbutamol with a nebulizer, which from the evidence in the case file shows either that it was requested by the supervising anesthesiologist with a long delay around 9.30 in the morning or that it came with a long time delay, as a result of which timely intervention in the treatment of bronchospasm with the administration of bronchodilators”.

– As far as bronchospasm is concerned, the court rules thatI was not treatede neither directly nor appropriately based on the algorithms provided for children.

“Based on these data, the court judges that, in violation of internationally recognized practices and children’s algorithms, the method of treating the complications presented by the 4-year-old upon awakening, by the organs of the defendant hospital, in combination with the failure to receive before the operation with informed consent by the parents of the minor patient after exposure to them of the possible risks of the surgery and the possible anesthetic complications from the administration of the relevant drugs, were (given the insufficient and untimely treatment of the bronchospasm) convenient causes, capable of lead causally in the ordinary course of things to the induction of hypoxia and pulmonary edema, resulting in the death of Melina, which is due to multiple organ failure syndrome on the ground of respiratory distress syndrome following episodes of severe hypoxemia and severe hypotension (cardiogenic shock) due to bronchospasm.”

However, it is interesting to note that the court concludes as follows:

“Furthermore, in view of the degree of proof that applies in the administrative trial, the above-mentioned causal link cannot be considered to have been interrupted by the assumption of the existence of a severe form of anaphylaxis, resistant to the administration of adrenaline, and unable to be treated, given that on the one hand in this case no only for bronchospasm but not for anaphylaxis, the generally recognized rules of medical science were followed, for which there can be no doubt, namely the applicable protocols and algorithms for infants-children, as predicted above, on the one hand because the case itself of anaphylaxis is not substantiated and proved by any formal findings and in this case is based only on the contradictory statements between the witnesses regarding the vital functions of the 4-year-old.”

The lawyers of the Paraskaki family, Giorgos Kokosalis and Evangelia Kleisarchakis, expressed their satisfaction with this development and especially with the reasoning, as they mentioned, of the decision.

“In these parents’ fight for justice, their voice and our voice was heard. Nothing is fair about the loss they are experiencing, it is not the natural order of things for children to leave this way. And this is precisely what was confirmed by the decision of the Three-member Administrative Court of First Instance of Heraklion, which in its reasoning with full and detailed reasoning answers why, despite the acquittal of the doctor-anesthesiologist by the First Three-member Criminal Court of Heraklion, both she and the Hospital were negligent against the exercise of their function and did not correctly apply the rules of their science. In that sense, for these parents, justice has been served and we are proud to have been able to provide them with at least that.”

However, it is estimated that the hospital will file an appeal.