NW v HH NHS FT – Hereford

Following the birth of her third child, the Claimant was admitted to hospital for “D&C” in January 2005.  No indication was given of any adverse outcome.  In April 2005, she underwent a pre-booked sterilisation procedure when again, no adverse outcome or other difficulty was reported.

Between June 2005 and March 2006, she suffered various problems – cessation of periods, stomach pain and lethargy.  In March 2006, she collapsed while out with her children and was admitted as an emergency.  IBS was diagnosed and she was sent home.  She was re-admitted by ambulance later that same month when a similar diagnosis was made.

At the end of March 2006, she attended the A&E Department of another hospital where an earlier scan was reviewed resulting in a and diagnosis of “blockage with a mass”, with suspicion of tumour.  She underwent surgery in April 2006 when cervical collapse was diagnosed and treated with a Mirena coil, to prevent further collapse. She was later informed that the collapse had been caused due to the onset of Asherman’s Syndrome.

On follow-up she was told that she would needfurther surgery – trans cervical resection of the endometrium, carried out in October 2006.

By Easter of 2007 the pain continued, by then unbearable.  On referral back to the local hospital where she was informed that she would need to undergo a hysterectomy ( and that the cervical  collapse had resulted in a huge build-up of blood, missed during the previous chapters of treatment.

Following specialist expert input post proceedings,it was established that the cervix had been damaged during the D&C causing the onset of Asherman’s Syndrome and that .there was a failure at the time of the procedure and subsequently to notice and/or report the damage caused/onset of the condition.  There was an ongoing failure to properly diagnose and/or treat the nature of the Claimant’s condition, in spite of multiple hospital attendances between January 2005 and November 2007.

The case settled before trial, the damages reflecting the significant physical pain, lost amenity,severe  mental anguish and lost fertility.  In addition, damages were recovered for significant loss of earnings (past and future) and the gratuitous care and home support provided by family and friends.

Skills

Posted on

23rd August 2017

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *