The patient’s expert witness noted that the severity of the third trimester symptoms warranted follow-up testing; the patient should not have had all of those symptoms so late in pregnancy. Testing would have revealed that, by not functioning properly, the liver was creating a toxic environment for the fetus. Labor should have been induced at 36 weeks when the fetal heart testing was still normal.
The ED nurses contacted the on-call ObGyn by telephone to discuss the patient’s symptoms; the ObGyn did not come to the ED to examine the patient or order testing.
The patient suffered emotional distress as a result of the loss of her child.
The medical center and the on-call ObGyn settled prior to trial.
The ObGyn claimed that the patient’s symptoms were common for pregnancy and that the disease could not be diagnosed based on the presented symptoms. It was not a violation of the standard of care for the extremely rare liver disease to not be diagnosed. The defense’s expert claimed that the symptoms reported by the patient did not warrant follow-up blood work. There was no way to determine whether or not the fetus died as a result of the mother’s liver disease or nuchal cord involvement.
A placental pathologist noted that the placenta was injured by thrombosis; the fetus’ death was most likely idiopathic. He later acknowledged that thrombosis can be related to liver disease.
Jurors were instructed to consider this a personal injury case for the mother due to an unborn fetus’ lacks standing for injury or death under California law. A $160,090 California verdict was returned against the ObGyn who provided prenatal care.
These cases were selected by the editors of
OBG Management from Medical Malpractice Verdicts, Settlements, & Experts, with permission of the editor, Lewis Laska (www.verdictslaska.com). The information available to the editors about the cases presented here is sometimes incomplete. Moreover, the cases may or may not have merit. Nevertheless, these cases represent the types of clinical situations that typically result in litigation and are meant to illustrate nationwide variation in jury verdicts
and awards.Share your thoughts! Send your Letter to the Editor to rbarbieri@frontlinemedcom.com. Please include your name and the city and state in which you practice.