Caesarean section is central to a large share of obstetric malpractice litigation, most often through allegations about timing. The recurring question is whether the care team recognized the indications for operative delivery, such as a non-reassuring fetal heart rate, failure to progress, cord prolapse, placental abruption, or uterine rupture, and proceeded to caesarean section quickly enough to avoid harm to the infant or mother.
Decision-to-delivery intervals, the interpretation of electronic fetal monitoring, and the availability of anaesthesia and operating room resources all feature in these cases. The standard of care is established through expert evidence from obstetrics, anaesthesia, nursing, and sometimes neonatology, and is calibrated to the clinical picture as it unfolded rather than judged with hindsight. Causation in cases involving alleged delay turns on what difference an earlier delivery would have made to the outcome.
Posts tagged Caesarean Section analyze Ontario decisions involving the timing and conduct of caesarean delivery, including cases connected to hypoxic-ischemic injury and maternal harm.
A 17-day birth injury trial. Battery, informed consent, five negligence allegations, and causation all addressed and rejected. A multi-ground defence dismissal.
The Court of Appeal affirmed a $12 million plaintiff verdict for catastrophic maternal brain injury, rejecting the defence theory of amniotic fluid embolism.
A BC trial judge found an obstetrician 85% liable and obstetrical nurses 15% liable for skull fractures and brain damage caused during a difficult caesarean section.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.