Woman awarded $9m for hospital negligence

The Supreme Court has awarded damages of more than $9 million to a woman for negligence in the removal of her womb at the Spanish Town Hospital almost nine years ago.

The verdict was handed down by Justice Carol Lawrence-Beswick on May 27, 2020, in favour of Octavia Chambers against the South East Regional Health Authority, which manages the hospital.

The suit was filed by the law firm Kinghorn and Kinghorn, which had sought $17 million.

It was revealed that on October 7, 2011, Chambers was admitted to the Spanish Town Hospital to treat a septic miscarriage.

Attorney-at-law Sean Kinghorn contended that his client was not made aware of alternative treatment or properly counselled about the procedure.

The defendants, buttressed by evidence by Dr Sherika Pearson, then junior resident in obstetrics and gynaecology; Dr Kingsley Ford, then senior registrar; and Dr Leslie Samuels, fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, argued that the procedure – “evacuation of retained products of conception” – was executed because Chambers’ life was in jeopardy because she was bleeding heavily. It was estimated that she had lost up to 75 per cent of blood volume.

But the claimant argued that although she signed three consent forms, Pearson did not sufficiently apprise her of the three options available – vaginal insertion of a tablet; dilation and curettage (D&C); and the vacuum/suction curettage procedure – and that the latter was the least risky.

Pearson acknowledged not informing Chambers of the vacuum curettage procedure because that service was not accessible at Spanish Town or any other public hospital. It was only available at the University Hospital of the West Indies.

Justice Lawrence-Beswick said in her ruling that patients were no longer living in an era in which the opinions of medical personnel went without question.

ACTIVE PARTICIPATION

“Patients are now taken to have rights, including the right to be an active participant in the choice of treatment to be administered, having been made fully aware of the known risks,” Justice Lawrence-Beswick said.

“There is a duty on the medical profession to properly inform patients of available options to allow for the patient to make an informed decision as to her own treatment. An uninformed signing of a consent form whilst awaiting treatment in a hospital is not enough.”

Kinghorn anchored the claim for a $17-million payout on the case of Tanya Clarke v Dr Soe Win, Dr Bennett, and the attorney general of Jamaica. But the judge ruled that Clarke’s case was deemed manifestly more compelling because Clarke suffered greater psychological and physical damage, among other factors.

Chambers, 32, was married at the time and had had three children. Clarke was 19 at the time of her incident and would have lost more child-bearing years.

General damages of $9 million and special damages of $16,000 were awarded to Chambers. Interest will be calculated at three per cent per annum since the claim was lodged.