The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

THE Public Hospitals Authority will accept a Supreme Court finding that Princess Margaret Hospital’s failure to monitor a distressed unborn baby for 27 minutes caused her fatal injury, saying it will not appeal the ruling or challenge the damages awarded to the child’s mother.

PHA managing director Aubynette Rolle said the authority would not prolong the case or force Widline Guillaume’s family to relive the death of newborn Elizabeth Lundy, who died just over two hours after she was born on August 2, 2022.

Ms Rolle said the authority would move forward and learn from the case to prevent a recurrence.

Acting Justice Raynard Rigby, KC, found that PMH and consultant obstetrician Dr Agatha Foulkes-Mackey breached the required standard of care when Ms Guillaume and her baby were left unmonitored outside the operating theatre between 4.10am and 4.37am while awaiting an emergency caesarean section.

The judge concluded that the 27-minute lapse caused the oxygen deprivation that led to Elizabeth’s fatal injury.

Ms Rolle said yesterday that PHA had no intention of challenging either the ruling or the damages to be awarded.

“And as an attorney myself, there’s no need to go back to one frustrate the court and two to relive this matter with family members,” she said.

“Like my minister said, we want to extend sincere condolences to the family and the loss of their loved one.”

Justice Rigby rejected the defence’s argument that Elizabeth died because of an undetected congenital heart condition. He instead accepted expert evidence that the baby died from perinatal asphyxia caused by oxygen deprivation.

The judge found there was no unreasonable delay in deciding to perform the emergency caesarean section or in carrying it out after the decision was made.

Instead, he ruled that the negligence arose because no monitoring took place while Ms Guillaume waited for the result of a COVID-19 test before surgery.

Signs of foetal distress had already been detected before the decision to operate, making continued monitoring essential. However, no evidence was presented explaining the baby’s condition during the 27-minute period before the procedure.

Ms Rolle said PHA would use the ruling to improve compliance with its policies and procedures, raise standards where necessary and strengthen staff training.

“At the end of the day, I think what this does is two things: it moves us in the direction to ensure that our policies, procedures are adhered to, and also, if they are not, to move up to the level of standard, as well as to ensure that staff are educated,” she said.

“So the PHA at this moment has no intentions of going back against the ruling and an order of the court in terms of their ruling, as well as any cost that is associated with the ruling.”

Health and Wellness Minister Dr Michael Darville described the baby’s death as a tragedy and said the case should become a learning experience for the healthcare system.

“There is always malpractice issues at every hospital in every country,” Dr Darville said.

“It’s very unfortunate, but I can tell you from our risk management and our team, any malpractice case is a process of learning, and the PHA is now addressing the issue prior to the finalisation of the case to improve the delivery of services, not only in the antenatal area but also through the entire hospital.”

He said the case should provide lessons for PHA, the clinicians involved and associated medical staff.

“And once again, I’m sure that the family is satisfied with the ruling, and we need to make sure things like this do not happen at our hospitals,” Dr Darville said. “And once they do happen, for us to be completely transparent in the process.”

Justice Rigby also criticised the absence of evidence concerning Elizabeth’s care after birth, the failure to perform an autopsy and the decision not to call several key medical witnesses.

He further pointed to the failure to produce PMH’s COVID-19 protocols during the trial, although the testing requirement contributed to Ms Guillaume’s wait before surgery.

The judge ordered that damages be assessed by the Registrar of the Supreme Court. He also directed the defendants to pay Ms Guillaume’s legal costs if the parties are unable to agree on an amount.