Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors, LLC, is a premier Maryland-based, nationally-respected and highly regarded medical malpractice law firm. For an initial courtesy consultation, call us at (410) 720-6129 or (410_ 730-5016, or email us at charlesjeromeware@msn.com.
This medical malpractice action involved the birth of a mother’s third child that occurred almost 20 years before the settlement was reached and the Statute of Limitations was tolled during the minority of the child.
The plaintiff contended that the nurses at the defendant hospital negligently failed to determine the presence of fetal distress on the fetal monitor strips when the mother was first attached to the machine. The plaintiff maintained that she was told she should leave the hospital only to receive a message a few hours later that she should immediately return because of the earlier fetal monitoring strips were non-reassuring.
Notably, the care at issue occurred before the ubiquitous use of mobile phones. The mother returned around 3 hours later. The defendant ob/gyn was then called into the case. The plaintiff contended that this physician, who passed away before the suit was filed, negligently delayed performing an emergency C-section for two hours despite signs of fetal distress. The plaintiff contended that as a result of the negligence, the child suffered hypoxia, cerebral palsy and a significantly reduction in his comprehension abilities. The child can walk, carry on a conversation, but it was undisputed that he has deficits which the plaintiff maintained will prevent meaningful employment and attempts to lead a normal life.
The nurses denied that the mother was advised that she could leave the hospital shortly after 1:00 p.m. The hospital maintained that the mother removed herself from the fetal heart monitoring and essentially left the hospital against medical advice. The records did not specifically reflect that the mother left against medical advice, but did indicate that she voluntarily took herself off the monitor and left on her own accord.
The mother denied this and contended that it was clearly doubtful that a woman delivering her third child, and who went to the hospital because she believed labor might be occurring, would unilaterally leave the hospital without approval to do so from the nurses. The plaintiff would have argued that common sense and logic would support the position that an individual who had always been a compliant patient and had delivered two prior child would not leave the hospital unless she was told she could do so.
The defendant hospital also maintained that irrespective of this position, the ob/gyn did not perform a C-section for over two hours after arriving, during which period, the plaintiff maintained, the fetal monitoring strips showed continuing signs of a hostile uterine environment and fetal distress. The baby was delivered by C-section at 6:06 p.m --- five hours after she initially left the hospital. The child was born with Apgars of 0, 0, 0 and 3 and a cord pH of ________.
The plaintiff maintained that the permanent brain damage was very significant, irrespective of the fact that the plaintiff can carry on a conversation with others. The plaintiff would have argued that the jury should take into account that the plaintiff has the ability to realize the extent of his difficulties and that the fact that he is aware of the nature of his plight renders the pain, suffering and emotional suffering even greater than someone with total cognitive impairment.
The defendant hospital maintained that irrespective of the resolution of the factual dispute regarding the question of whether the mother left the hospital shortly after 1:00 p.m. against medical advice, it was clear from the evidence that after she returned around 4:00 p.m., and was attended to by the ob/gyn, and his decision not to perform the C-section for another two hours, during which period the plaintiff contended that the strips showed clear signs of fetal distress, was the proximate cause of the child’s injuries. The case settled prior to trial, with both the OB/GYN and the hospital paying the total of $4.15 million.
[http://www.jvra.com/verdict_trak/artcle/JVRA August 2014]
The plaintiff contended that the nurses at the defendant hospital negligently failed to determine the presence of fetal distress on the fetal monitor strips when the mother was first attached to the machine. The plaintiff maintained that she was told she should leave the hospital only to receive a message a few hours later that she should immediately return because of the earlier fetal monitoring strips were non-reassuring.
Notably, the care at issue occurred before the ubiquitous use of mobile phones. The mother returned around 3 hours later. The defendant ob/gyn was then called into the case. The plaintiff contended that this physician, who passed away before the suit was filed, negligently delayed performing an emergency C-section for two hours despite signs of fetal distress. The plaintiff contended that as a result of the negligence, the child suffered hypoxia, cerebral palsy and a significantly reduction in his comprehension abilities. The child can walk, carry on a conversation, but it was undisputed that he has deficits which the plaintiff maintained will prevent meaningful employment and attempts to lead a normal life.
The nurses denied that the mother was advised that she could leave the hospital shortly after 1:00 p.m. The hospital maintained that the mother removed herself from the fetal heart monitoring and essentially left the hospital against medical advice. The records did not specifically reflect that the mother left against medical advice, but did indicate that she voluntarily took herself off the monitor and left on her own accord.
The mother denied this and contended that it was clearly doubtful that a woman delivering her third child, and who went to the hospital because she believed labor might be occurring, would unilaterally leave the hospital without approval to do so from the nurses. The plaintiff would have argued that common sense and logic would support the position that an individual who had always been a compliant patient and had delivered two prior child would not leave the hospital unless she was told she could do so.
The defendant hospital also maintained that irrespective of this position, the ob/gyn did not perform a C-section for over two hours after arriving, during which period, the plaintiff maintained, the fetal monitoring strips showed continuing signs of a hostile uterine environment and fetal distress. The baby was delivered by C-section at 6:06 p.m --- five hours after she initially left the hospital. The child was born with Apgars of 0, 0, 0 and 3 and a cord pH of ________.
The plaintiff maintained that the permanent brain damage was very significant, irrespective of the fact that the plaintiff can carry on a conversation with others. The plaintiff would have argued that the jury should take into account that the plaintiff has the ability to realize the extent of his difficulties and that the fact that he is aware of the nature of his plight renders the pain, suffering and emotional suffering even greater than someone with total cognitive impairment.
The defendant hospital maintained that irrespective of the resolution of the factual dispute regarding the question of whether the mother left the hospital shortly after 1:00 p.m. against medical advice, it was clear from the evidence that after she returned around 4:00 p.m., and was attended to by the ob/gyn, and his decision not to perform the C-section for another two hours, during which period the plaintiff contended that the strips showed clear signs of fetal distress, was the proximate cause of the child’s injuries. The case settled prior to trial, with both the OB/GYN and the hospital paying the total of $4.15 million.
[http://www.jvra.com/verdict_trak/artcle/JVRA August 2014]
No comments:
Post a Comment