User login
Case reprinted with permission from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements and Experts, Lewis Laska, Editor, (800) 298-6288.
During a vaginal delivery performed by a nurse-midwife, the infant of a North Carolina woman sustained a moderate brachial plexus injury with shoulder dystocia.
The plaintiff claimed that the nurse-midwife failed to call in her backup physician to help with the delivery. The plaintiff also claimed that the nurse-midwife pulled too hard on the infant’s head during the delivery, leading to the injury. The defendant denied negligence.
Outcome
According to a published account, a $950,000 verdict was returned.
Comment
Cases involving shoulder dystocia in a vaginal delivery are notoriously difficult to defend. Plaintiffs are successful in claiming that infant size, with known potential for shoulder dystocia, should have been anticipated, especially when sonograms are so widely available. Once again, an advanced practice nurse, in this case a nurse-midwife, is faulted for failing to consult a physician. It is no wonder there is such an increase in the number of cesarean deliveries that are being performed. The cost of taking a chance is just too great.
It is difficult to know from the facts presented here whether the nurse-midwife erred. But it is well known among plaintiff lawyers that every parent expects a perfect baby, and when that is not the outcome, someone must be blamed. —JP
Case reprinted with permission from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements and Experts, Lewis Laska, Editor, (800) 298-6288.
During a vaginal delivery performed by a nurse-midwife, the infant of a North Carolina woman sustained a moderate brachial plexus injury with shoulder dystocia.
The plaintiff claimed that the nurse-midwife failed to call in her backup physician to help with the delivery. The plaintiff also claimed that the nurse-midwife pulled too hard on the infant’s head during the delivery, leading to the injury. The defendant denied negligence.
Outcome
According to a published account, a $950,000 verdict was returned.
Comment
Cases involving shoulder dystocia in a vaginal delivery are notoriously difficult to defend. Plaintiffs are successful in claiming that infant size, with known potential for shoulder dystocia, should have been anticipated, especially when sonograms are so widely available. Once again, an advanced practice nurse, in this case a nurse-midwife, is faulted for failing to consult a physician. It is no wonder there is such an increase in the number of cesarean deliveries that are being performed. The cost of taking a chance is just too great.
It is difficult to know from the facts presented here whether the nurse-midwife erred. But it is well known among plaintiff lawyers that every parent expects a perfect baby, and when that is not the outcome, someone must be blamed. —JP
Case reprinted with permission from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements and Experts, Lewis Laska, Editor, (800) 298-6288.
During a vaginal delivery performed by a nurse-midwife, the infant of a North Carolina woman sustained a moderate brachial plexus injury with shoulder dystocia.
The plaintiff claimed that the nurse-midwife failed to call in her backup physician to help with the delivery. The plaintiff also claimed that the nurse-midwife pulled too hard on the infant’s head during the delivery, leading to the injury. The defendant denied negligence.
Outcome
According to a published account, a $950,000 verdict was returned.
Comment
Cases involving shoulder dystocia in a vaginal delivery are notoriously difficult to defend. Plaintiffs are successful in claiming that infant size, with known potential for shoulder dystocia, should have been anticipated, especially when sonograms are so widely available. Once again, an advanced practice nurse, in this case a nurse-midwife, is faulted for failing to consult a physician. It is no wonder there is such an increase in the number of cesarean deliveries that are being performed. The cost of taking a chance is just too great.
It is difficult to know from the facts presented here whether the nurse-midwife erred. But it is well known among plaintiff lawyers that every parent expects a perfect baby, and when that is not the outcome, someone must be blamed. —JP