Compensation of £35,000 secured for avoidable still birth following shoulder dystocia
17 April 2024
The specialist clinical negligence team at Curtis Law Solicitors has secured a settlement of £35,000 from South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust after establishing that the failure to properly advise our client on the risks of shoulder dystocia led to the still birth of her baby.
Mrs D's pregnancy was originally assessed as being low risk and suitable for midwifery-led care, but worsening asthma led to her transfer for consultant-led care from 20 weeks onwards. This led to serial ultrasound growth scans at 28, 32, 36 and 38 weeks. The third growth scan revealed increased fetal growth velocity and our client was referred to a trial looking at whether earlier induction of labour, at around 38 weeks, reduced the risk of shoulder dystocia where the baby was predicted to be large.
As part of the induction/review process, our client stated a preference for vaginal delivery and she was provided with The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) Shoulder Dystocia Information Leaflet that was in use at the time. Neither the trial documentation nor the RCOG leaflet contained any information about the risk of still birth or neonatal death as a result of shoulder dystocia. In addition, there was no documented discussion with our client counselling her about the risks of shoulder dystocia and of vaginal birth versus caesarean section, specifically the risk of still birth or neonatal death.
Tragically, our client’s baby was still born after suffering devastating hypoxic brain damage as a consequence of shoulder dystocia.
These events were investigated by the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch. Within the HSIB Report the clinic panel noted that the risk of neonatal death was not included in the RCOG leaflet in use at the time. Cases like this one resulted in a subsequent national recommendation about information that should be shared with mothers during counselling regarding mode of birth in those identified to be at high risk for shoulder dystocia.
In reliance on the 2015 UK Supreme Court decision in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 1, we asserted that the Trust had breached its duty of care to our client for failing to explicitly explain that severe brain injury and still birth were possible outcomes of shoulder dystocia. We argued that our client had relied on the information that she had been given when electing to have a vaginal delivery, and that she would have elected for caesarean section had she known the full risks. She therefore did not provide informed consent on her choice of vaginal delivery over caesarean section.
We secured admissions of liability from the Trust and it was accepted that but for the various breaches of duty, our client would have undergone an elective caesarean section and her baby would have lived.
Our client was psychologically damaged as a consequence of her ordeal and she required extensive care and assistance from her family. We secured independent expert evidence confirming that she required psychological treatment. A settlement of £35,000 was achieved.
Kenneth Lees, Head of Department, said ‘This is a tragic case where our client’s baby was still born due to the failure to provide her with all of the information that she needed to choose her mode of delivery on a fully informed basis. Whilst no sum of money will ever truly compensate for the loss of a baby, the compensation that we secured for our client enabled her to arrange private treatment for the psychological impact of these events and to arrange a memorial for her baby’.
If you wish to discuss a potential clinical negligence claim with our specialist solicitors you can email us, use our online enquiry form, or call us for free on 0800 008 7450.