BLB Solicitors
BLB Solicitors
  • Home
  • COVID-19 Hub
  • Services for You
    • Residential Property
    • Leasehold Property Rights
    • Property Dispute Resolution
    • Divorce and Family Law
    • Lifetime Planning and Wills
    • Probate and Estate Administration
    • Personal Injury Compensation
    • Medical Negligence
  • Services for Business
    • Commercial Property
    • Commercial Property Disputes
    • Company & Commercial
    • Estate Management
  • Locations
    • Almondsbury
    • Bath
    • Bristol
    • Bradford on Avon
    • Swindon
    • Trowbridge
  • About Us
    • Our Team
    • Working for BLB
    • How we work
    • Making Payments
    • Instructing BLB
    • Terms of Business
    • Complaints Policy
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Medical Negligence May 1st, 2015

Hospital not negligent in the monitoring of premature baby’s breathing

In the case of Aspinall v Secretary of State for Health (2014) allegations were made of negligent hospital care following the premature birth of a baby at 32 weeks.

At 9.55 pm on 8th April 1982 John Apinall (the Claimant) was delivered prematurely by caesarean section at a hospital for which the Defendant had legal responsibility. The Claimant was born in a poor condition and showed no signs of life other than a slow heart rate. He was intubated, successfully resuscitated and transferred to the Special Care Baby Unit. Over a 45 minute period between 11.30 pm on the 8th April and 12.15 am on the 9th April the Claimant deteriorated to a perilous state. It was common ground that his ventilation tube had slipped out of position by 12.15 am. Although the tube was reinserted and the Claimant received intensive care, he developed hyaline membrane disease (a stiffening of the lungs) and at some point suffered a bleed in the brain. The resulting brain injury left him with asymmetric diplegic cerebral palsy, cognitive, behavioural and physical problems, and epilepsy.

The Claimant’s case was that although he had stopped breathing at about 11.30 pm, the attending doctor failed to check or otherwise notice that his chest was not moving in time with the ventilator over the crucial 45 minute period. According to the Claimant’s medical expert, it was probable that the ventilation tube had slipped out of place by 11.30 pm and the Claimant only survived because he received a small amount of oxygen from the displaced tube.

Dismissing the claim, the High Court held that the doctor had not been negligent in treating the Claimant between 11.30 pm and 12.15 am. The theory of the Claimant’s medical expert was no more than speculation. A more likely theory was that the ventilation tube had become dislodged in a non-negligent way nearer to 12.15 am when the doctor checked it for secretions. It was almost inconceivable that the doctor and nurses in the Special Care Unit could have monitored the Claimant over 45 minutes without noticing that his chest was not moving.

The Court concluded that there had been no breach of duty and, in any event, the alleged breach did not cause the very sad outcome.

David Gazzard
Make an Enquiry

Recent Stories

  • What is common law marriage?
  • A Budget to stimulate the housing market
  • Do I need a lawyer to get divorced?
  • What are service charges?
  • Is a surprise extension to the Stamp Duty holiday imminent?

Newsletter Sign-up

* indicates required

Share this article

You may also like...

  • Apr 1st, 2015
    The Blame Game
    Read Article
  • May 1st, 2015
    GP liable for failure to diagnose bacterial meningitis
    Read Article
View All Related Articles

Get in-touch today

Contact Form

Left Column

Right Column

Centre

 
Sending
  • Bristol

    0117 905 5308
  • Bath

    01225 462871
  • Bradford on Avon

    01225 866541
  • Swindon

    01793 615011
  • Trowbridge

    01225 755656
  • Almondsbury

    0117 905 5308
Authorised & Regulated by Solicitors Regulation Authority (No. 636644)
©2021 BLB Solicitors | Terms | Privacy | Legal