ACT Supreme Court finds Canberra Hospital negligent after emergency c-section

Kristin Read successfully sued the ACT government, which runs the hospital, for negligence after the birth of her second child in 2017.

Her pregnancy was complicated by medical conditions and risks to her own health and that of the baby.

As a result, she spent 25 days in the hospital prior to the child's premature birth at 34 weeks. The baby was taken to the neonatal intensive care unit and released from hospital in November 2017.

The child was born by emergency caesarean section after significant bleeding. During the operation, Ms Read lost about three litres of blood.

The operation was completed just before midnight and Ms Read was transferred to the birth suite in the hospital at 2am.

She went into a second surgery about 9.30am after suffering from internal bleeding from a uterine artery.

During the second surgery, Ms Read lost another 3.5 litres of blood, bringing the total loss to 6.5 litres.

READ ALSO:

In April last year, magistrate Robert Cook found the hospital had breached its duty to the woman by failing to recognise the internal bleeding several hours earlier and not taking steps to quickly get her into surgery.

He found the delay resulted from negligence, but the need to undergo a second surgery to address the bleeding was not negligent. Mr Cook awarded $50,000 in damages and more than $2000 for out-of-pocket expenses.

The case subsequently moved to the ACT Supreme Court, where Justice David Mossop this week dismissed an appeal by Ms Read but allowed a cross-appeal by the ACT government.

Justice Mossop reduced the quantum of damages to $15,080 and removed the out-of-pocket expenses payout. He found Ms Read's claims of harm and resulting psychological injury would have occurred even without the three-hour delay.

"The combination of 32 days in hospital including significant ante partum bleeding, an emergency caesarean followed by internal bleeding, followed by a second surgery in order to correct the internal bleeding and a period in the ICU would have caused equivalent intrusive thoughts about, and memories of, her experiences," Justice Mossop said.

"That is not to deny that [Ms Read] is entitled to compensation for the anxiety and discomfort suffered during the period of delay when she continued to bleed internally and have an elevated heart rate, and any additional consequences that can be proved to have flowed from the additional loss of blood."

Ms Read previously gave evidence that she experienced flashbacks when water would soak through her clothes from doing dishes or cleaning her babies.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: