A woman who suffered substantial trauma during forceps delivery of her third child, resulting in the need for a hysterectomy at just 26 years old, was awarded £280,000 in compensation.
The claimant ‘C’ was expecting a large baby and had previous history of shoulder dystocia in the birth of another child. With these concerns, she repeatedly requested a caesarean section but was told she couldn’t have one.
Instead, a doctor made an inappropriate attempt to deliver the baby using forceps, during which the woman’s vagina, uterus, fallopian tubes and ovaries were severely damaged.
She lost 6.5 litres of blood requiring a blood transfusion. She also needed an emergency caesarean followed by an emergency hysterectomy and surgical repair of lacerations to her vagina.
She sought the advice of Medical Solicitors director, Christine Brown, a senior solicitor specialising in medical negligence claims, to make a claim for compensation.
Case summary
During the birth of her previous child, C’s baby had become stuck in the birth canal, known as shoulder dystocia. However, she was not told of the implications of any subsequent pregnancies.
When she became pregnant again, the history of shoulder dystocia wasn’t recorded in her notes and no investigations took place throughout the pregnancy.
C’s third baby was measuring above normal size, but she wasn’t informed of the risks of a vaginal delivery, or the option to have a planned C-section. At 38 weeks pregnant, C expressed her concerns about the size of her baby, but no measurements were taken.
She went into labour five days overdue and had a slow labour. The midwife noted the baby felt big and a registrar noted the previous shoulder dystocia but recorded no further details.
By the second stage of labour, C felt she was making no progress with pushing and that the baby felt stuck. Her concerns and request for a C-section were dismissed by midwives who said it was a matter for a doctor. The doctor in question told her to keep pushing for another hour but gave no advice about a prolonged labour.
C was convinced her baby couldn’t be delivered naturally and asked again for a C-section but was told no and to keep pushing.
After an hour of pushing, the doctor examined C and incorrectly assessed the position of the baby’s head as being engaged. They suggested C be transferred to theatre for forceps delivery and, if that failed, a c-section would be performed. Again, no advice about the risks and benefits of either method were given. C’s paramount concern was the safe delivery of her child, and she was prevented from making an informed choice about how she gave birth.
In theatre, a consultant found the baby’s head was in fact in a traverse position (sideways) – this was not detected by the doctor during vaginal examination. This malposition has a higher risk during forceps delivery. They were unable to rotate the baby and, when applying the rear forceps blade, C suffered substantial trauma to her genital tract resulting in a massive blood loss.
The baby was delivered via emergency caesarean and C then needed an emergency hysterectomy due to the nature of her injuries.
C is now infertile and at risk of early menopause and pelvic floor prolapse. Since the events, she has a new partner with whom she wants to have a child. She will need to undergo IVF and surrogacy in the USA to be able to have any more children.
Litigation
The defendant NHS Trust accepted that, had C been properly advised of the risks of a vaginal delivery with a large baby and history of shoulder dystocia, she would have opted to have an elective c-section. This would have avoided the hysterectomy caused by injuries sustained during the attempted forceps delivery.
The case settled in September 2020 for £280,000. This included £125,000 general damages and £155,000 special damages which accounts for potential surrogacy costs.
