$7.5 Million Settlement in Cerebral Palsy Case

Attorneys Daniel S. Weinstock and Carolyn M. Chopko secured a $7.5 million settlement in Mississippi for an infant who suffered birth asphyxia leading to cerebral palsy after multiple medical providers failed to appreciate and act upon medical test results indicating fetal distress that necessitated immediate delivery.

The child’s mother was admitted to the hospital for a work-up of preeclampsia and continuous fetal monitoring. As part of the work-up, a biophysical profile (BPP) was done, which was significantly abnormal, demonstrating fetal ascites (fluid accumulation in the fetal abdomen), an enlarged right fetal atrium, and oligohydramnios (low levels of amniotic fluid in the uterus). The ultrasonographer who performed the BPP was so alarmed by the findings that she literally ran down the hallway to make sure that the defendant radiologist reviewed the images before going home for the day. Notwithstanding, the radiologist missed all of the abnormalities in the BPP.

As a result of this medical error, the defendant obstetrician responsible for the mother’s care was never informed of the abnormalities and went home, ordering an hour of fetal monitoring every six hours overnight. The obstetrician indicated during the course of the litigation that if he had known about the abnormalities demonstrated in the BPP, he would have immediately had the patient transferred to a regional hospital that could provide a higher level of care.

The overnight fetal monitoring strips were clearly non-reassuring, meaning that the baby was in distress. However, it is unclear whether any medical personnel trained in electronic fetal monitoring interpretation reviewed these tracings during the night, and they were not brought to the attention of the defendant obstetrician.

The next morning, electronic fetal monitoring was resumed, and the nurse at bedside notified the defendant obstetrician that the findings were Category III, which means they were indicative of metabolic acidosis (a condition where the baby’s blood becomes too acidic) and mandated immediate delivery.

However, despite four telephone calls from the nursing staff to the defendant obstetrician, the doctor declined to review the fetal monitoring tracings, come to bedside, or to ask another OB/GYN to assist. Instead, he began an elective, non-emergent cesarean section on another patient and ordered a repeat of the BPP, which made no sense given the emergent nature of the Category III fetal monitoring tracings.

The same ultrasonographer and radiologist performed and interpreted the repeat BPP. Despite the images of the two BPPs being essentially the same, this time the radiologist had no difficulties seeing the abnormalities seen the day before and that morning by the ultrasonographer. The radiologist notified the obstetrician of the fetal status, but at this point the fetal condition was clearly deteriorating. There was no time to initiate a transfer to a regional hospital more prepared to care for the baby because the fetal condition was so precarious.

After eventually concluding his elective, non-emergent cesarean section on the other patient, the obstetrician delivered this infant. As a consequence of the delayed delivery, the child suffered birth asphyxia-induced spastic, quadriplegic cerebral palsy. He is unable to take care of any of his activities of daily living and will require 24-hour care for the rest of his life.