User login
An episiotomy performed on a 28-year-old woman during delivery extended into a perineal laceration. Five days following the delivery, the repair broke, causing the woman fecal and gas incontinence. She required follow-up surgery 7 months later to repair the damage.
The woman alleged the doctor was negligent in the repair, and that as a result of this negligence 2 subsequent pregnancies had to be delivered by cesarean.
The physician contended that her injury was a known risk of the procedure. In addition, he suggested the broken repair was caused by factors other than the quality of his repair at birth.
- The jury returned a defense verdict.
An episiotomy performed on a 28-year-old woman during delivery extended into a perineal laceration. Five days following the delivery, the repair broke, causing the woman fecal and gas incontinence. She required follow-up surgery 7 months later to repair the damage.
The woman alleged the doctor was negligent in the repair, and that as a result of this negligence 2 subsequent pregnancies had to be delivered by cesarean.
The physician contended that her injury was a known risk of the procedure. In addition, he suggested the broken repair was caused by factors other than the quality of his repair at birth.
- The jury returned a defense verdict.
An episiotomy performed on a 28-year-old woman during delivery extended into a perineal laceration. Five days following the delivery, the repair broke, causing the woman fecal and gas incontinence. She required follow-up surgery 7 months later to repair the damage.
The woman alleged the doctor was negligent in the repair, and that as a result of this negligence 2 subsequent pregnancies had to be delivered by cesarean.
The physician contended that her injury was a known risk of the procedure. In addition, he suggested the broken repair was caused by factors other than the quality of his repair at birth.
- The jury returned a defense verdict.