A gynaecologist has lost her Supreme Court appeal against a decision that she was negligent in performing an operation to remove a dead foetus.
It was claimed that, due to the negligence of Dr Rachael Patton, part of a bone was left in a woman's body for more than a month after the evacuation procedure.
Ms Fiona Griffin had sued Dr Patton, an obstetrician gynaecologist at the Bon Secours Hospital, Cork, claiming a 5.5 centimetre- long bone was left in her uterus after an operation on January 23rd, 1998 to evacuate a 17-week-old dead foetus.
Last year, the High Court upheld the claim by Ms Griffin (45), Estuary Walk, Ballynoe, Cobh, Co Cork against Dr Patton and awarded €100,000 to Ms Griffin.The High Court struck out Ms Griffin's proceedings against the hospital relating to the absence of any request by doctors for a vacuum suction curette machine for the hospital.
Mrs Griffin had sued for pain and suffering as a result of part of the dead foetus being left inside her. She had to have a further surgical procedure later to remove that part.
In her defence, Dr Patton said she believed that, following the completion of the procedure, she had completely removed it. She agreed that pieces could be left behind.
In her Supreme Court appeal, Mr Patrick Hanratty SC, for Dr Patton, argued the High Court judge had failed to resolve whether Dr Patton failed in her duty of care to Mrs Griffin.
The Supreme Court was asked to set aside the judgment of the High Court or to direct a retrial of the action. Yesterday, the five-judge Supreme Court unanimously rejected the appeal.
Giving the court's judgment, Mr Justice Geoghegan said it was relevant that, unsurprisingly, all the doctors who gave evidence agreed that it was incumbent on the doctor carrying out this surgical procedure to satisfy themselves that all parts of the foetus were removed.
It was also common case among the medical experts who gave evidence that, without negligence, small pieces of soft tissue could be accidentally left behind.
That normally presented no problem because, within days, these were passed out of the body in the normal way.
What was at issue between the experts was whether a piece of bone, 5.5 centimetres in length, could be accidentally left behind in the uterus without there being negligence on the part of the surgeon, the judge said.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said it was clear that the trial judge paid particular attention to Dr Patton's evidence and then found as a fact that, as a matter of probability, Dr Patton had not correctly carried out the assessment of what had been removed.
There was no argument based on the medical negligence jurisprudence of the courts which disentitled the High Court judge from adopting that course, Mr Justice Geoghegan said. The appeal was therefore dismissed.