Inquest into death of newborn baby raises financial concerns
- 19.04.2016
- LesleyHerbertson
- Clinical-negligence, Clinical-negligence
I read about a senior coroner, Andrew Walker, who sent a report to the Department of Health, following an inquest into the death of a newborn, Kristian Jaworski, on the basis that he considered that financial reasons had influenced the treating medical staff’s decision in favouring a vaginal delivery over a caesarean section.
It is reported that Kristian’s mother, Tracey Taylor, had told her treating doctors that, following the birth of her previous child 3½ years earlier, she had been advised that she had a narrow birth canal and that all future deliveries should take place by way of caesarean section.
However, that information was not recorded in her maternity records and she was, nevertheless, encouraged to have a vaginal delivery.
Whatever the reasoning behind the decision by medical staff to proceed with a vaginal delivery, we would argue that Tracey Taylor’s voice should have been heard and her wishes given proper and due consideration.
A 2015 court decision, made in Scotland, has reinforced the taking into account a patient’s specific views and wishes in arriving at any treatment decisions.
On one level, the decision in Montgomery, simply confirmed previous law, that when it comes to consent to medical treatment, patients should be treated as capable, competent adults and their autonomy respected.
However, perhaps more importantly, the case reminded doctors that they should not adopt an “I know best” approach with patient care and that they should engage in a proper discussion with all patients about alternative reasonable treatments and the risks associated with each.
Perhaps Andrew Walker’s report will not only highlight his concerns about financial considerations being inappropriately taken into account but also, indirectly, reinforce the importance of doctors listening to patients, treating them as individuals and taking into account their views and wishes.