Posted on 06/30/2005 9:42:18 AM PDT by Coleus
Brain-damaged IVF stroke victim wins negligence case
SHAN ROSS
A WOMAN who was left brain damaged after a series of strokes following her third cycle of IVF was awarded "very substantial" agreed damages yesterday.
An emotive message from the 34-year-old accountant was read out in court by her QC.
In it, the woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, said: "IVF. I was so happy. Looked forward to my newborn baby. Unfortunately miscarried. Baby die. Disaster happen.
"Then stroke. Disaster. Now my face fine but my body will never be the same. My son is torn apart. One year hospital and now wheelchair. Why me? Still bubbly, but inside my body and brain cry, cry, cry."
The woman had succeeded in becoming pregnant after the fertility treatment but developed ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). She then miscarried after a stroke in August 2000 and had to spend a year in hospital.
She claimed at the High Court in London that she had received negligent care from fertility specialist Paul Rainsbury at the BUPA Roding Hospital, Ilford, Essex.
Mr Rainsbury's QC, John Grace, said liability was strongly at issue both in relation to breach of duty and the amount of damages.
The judge, Mr Justice Nelson, was told that if the case had gone to trial, the woman's factual evidence would have been inconsistent with contemporaneous medical notes.
Her QC, James Badenoch, said that the award - the details of which were not made public - meant that she could retain care of her only son and have some semblance of freedom from the constraints upon her.
Counsel said that the former "career girl" was a "gentle and charming lady", but had great difficulty with speech, mobility, reasoning and decision-making. She could not safely be left alone or get through the day unaided and relied on her devoted family for help. Her marriage, which was unhappy before her strokes, had ended, and she was unlikely to find another partner.
The judge approved the settlement.
Around 6,000 babies are born each year in the UK following IVF treatment but many women undergo up to four treatment cycles per session in an attempt to become pregnant. There have been individual case reports of blood clotting and stroke complications of severe OHSS and four deaths have been reported in world medical literature.
Potentially fatal OHSS affects around 1 per cent of women, although less severe cases are more common.
Lord Robert Winston, one of the world's leading fertility experts, said last night that he did not think doctors should advise women of the risk of a stroke from IVF treatment because it was an extremely rare occurrence.
"I am aware of such a thing happening perhaps two or even three times," he said. "I don't think there's any point of telling women the risk is there when it is such a small possibility.
"Doctors would have to sit down and go through every single associated risk - it would be like telling someone they could develop blood poisoning from giving a blood sample."
Women contemplating IVF which involves ovarian stimulation are warned before starting treatment that the procedure carries risks comparable with the risks of elective surgery. All women undergoing such treatment experience symptoms such as weight gain and a change in their hormonal balance.
However, while OHSS usually occurs a few days after embryo transfer being provoked by an hormonal injection, the symptoms vary in intensity. Some cases can be treated with bed rest and an intravenous drip.
But, on rare occasions, very serious complications have been associated with OHSS, including abnormal blood clotting which has caused strokes. Blood clots can migrate to the lungs, a complication which can prove fatal. Other severe symptoms can include enlarged ovaries twisting or bruising requiring surgery, and damage to the liver and kidneys.
In 2002 Temilola Akinbolagne from south London died from OHSS - the first such case in the UK. There are believed to have been three other such cases in Britain in the last 30 years.
This lady was in no position to have children.
It's too bad married couples don't adopt -- the loving option. Some men and women were just not made to have children. Another plan may have been made for certain married couples. IVF babies are more inclined to be unhealthy. And what happens to the "unsued" embryos. Diabolical procedures? A life in a frozen Gulag?
This statement is hardly consistent with the lady's winning a large negligence settlement. I suppose the judge might have reasoned, "She needs money, and it's just the insurance company paying, anyway," but that's not exactly sound jurisprudence.
"This lady was in no position to have children."
You're acting like the government.
Having a child was her call not yours.
Having a child appears to have been God's call in this instance.
So many children need homes, it seems very egotistical to pursue biological children when nature is unwilling to provide them.
Even though this complication is extremely rare, I don't see any reason why such a warning shouldn't be included at least in the fine print of forms the patient signs. But maybe that's because I'm American, and accustomed to seeing absolutely exhaustive warnings everywhere.
I'm not sure to what extent the British National Health Service controls the methods doctors use for IVF, but unless this doctor was limited by NHS-prescribed protocols, he deserved to get hit with the negligence judgement and award.
These severe complications are 100% avoidable, with frequent blood testing and ultrasounds during the 1-2 weeks of ovarian stimulation. A combination of high and rapidly rising estrogen levels and a large number of developing follicles signals trouble ahead, and it can be avoided by various methods such as sharply reducing the hormone dosages midstream, and (most commonly) freezing the embryos for later transfer, instead of transferring them fresh as planned (the hormonal changes associated with pregnancy greatly aggravate the hyperstimulation problems, so delaying the pregnancy attempt until the hyperstimulation has completely subsided is a reliable way to stop the problem from worsening to a dangerous level).
Very sad. If sensible procedures had been followed, this woman would almost certainly now be the healthy mother of a healthy baby.
That description of the woman was BEFORE the stroke, not after. Unhappy marriages are common, and while I personally don't think it's a good idea to have children in an already troubled marriage, it's a very common choice, both for religious reasons (people who believe that divorce is wrong and that having children is commanded by God), and for "ticking biological clock" reasons (women who know they're very unlikely to get a divorce and remarry, while they still have any fertility left).
Very interesting. Thanks for the details.
He didn't stop her, did he? He never claimed the right to stop her. He has every right to express his opinion of her decisions.
Are you saying that this woman miscarried as some sort of punishment or divine justice???
There's a shortage of babies thanks to abortion on demand. The red tape involved to be approved for adoption can be prohibitive too. There's more than one reason that they may have chosen this path. We really don't know.
Also a lot of couples are afraid of getting attached to a child only to have the biological parents change their minds a few years later and the courts siding with the biological family.
Clearly that would be hard to do from a fine net site like Free Republic and I don't see how you would imagine it to be possible.
Having said that I would add that the sentiment on FR appears to be that we are all free to live our lives as we chose without un-necessary involvement from the government or society at large.
Clearly FR represents a conservative point of view that is pro-life,pro-family,very much in favor of limited government and in favor of people who mind their own knitting. In fact, I think Free republicans are so much in favor of the latter that they may even object to opinions that encroach, by word or deed, pre or post conception, on a woman's decision to become pregnant,give birth,care for and support her child.
How can an opinion encroach by deed? If you want to restrict opinion, you are in the company of the worst statists that ever lived. People are going to disagree with everything you ever do in life. Trying to tell them they can never disagree is a far different animal that disagreement.
The tendency to squelch disagreement is often one of the worst tendencies of man. Disagreement is a healthy thing.
Notice I said "children" not babies. It is ego that demands babies, compassion that says any child.
Ego that says I don't want to take a chance on attachment and loss. It's all about me, my wants, my desires, my fantasy of the perfect life, the perfect child.
I don't understand your first question.
However, there wasn't an attempt to impede one's opinion, rather,there was disagreement with the opinion offered.
I think you are seeking to buttress your position by obfuscation instead of addressing the issue with an argument that relates to the topic at hand. There was no mention of restricting one's right to voice an opinion but there was a question as to the propriety of offering the opinion.
The matter of freedom of speech is often seen in an overbroad manner. Freedom of speech does not mean the right to be heard nor does it mean the right to be unchallenged.
It would be hard to imagine interpersonal speech that isn't opinion, written or spoken, aside from fiction, music or performance. It would be equally hard to imagine speech in which someone didn't disagree with the speaker's opinion.
Personally I have no problem with adopting older kids. There are all sorts of reasons why people choose to adopt babies over older kids. They aren't all based on selfishness either. They may not have passed all of the criteria necessary for adoption. There are an awful lot of hoops to jump through.
IVF is strictly forbidden by the Catholic Church for many reasons.
IVF is immoral.
Why?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.