Category: Birth Injuries

Altered Medical Files: “I think my records have been tampered with!”

by John McKiggan

Altering medical records does not happen as often as it appears to happen on television or in the movies. However, it happens enough that experienced medical malpractice lawyers develop a sense of when further investigation into the legitimacy of a medical record or chart is warranted.

One of my favourite movies of all times is The Verdict with Paul Newman. I love the scene where he finally realizes that he can prove that the defendant doctor altered the medical files of the woman who was left in a coma because of the doctor’s negligence.

Lessons Learned From Past Cases:

No “Wrongful Life” in Canada: Supreme Court

by John McKiggan

In Canada there is no such thing as a claim for “wrongful life”. In a ruling released last week, the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal a Court of Appeal decision that confirmed that Canadian law does not recognize the tort of “wrongful life” as a legitimate cause of action.

In Hergott, et al. v. Bovingdon the defendant doctor prescribed a fertility drug for the plaintiff mother. The doctor did not explain the risks of taking the drug to the mother.

The drug caused the mom to become pregnant with twins. Unfortunately, the twin pregnancy caused a premature birth, and the premature birth caused the twins to be born with severe disabilities.

Medical Malpractice Claim Over Birth Injuries Dismissed

by John McKiggan

An obstetrician’s failure to obtain informed consent was not the legal cause of an infant’s brain damage, according to a decision from Ontario.

The Ontario Court of Appeal just released a ruling upholding a trial decision dismissing a claim of obstetric malpractice.

In Cruz v. Robins the trial judge held that the use of forceps during the infant plaintiff’s delivery caused the baby’s brachial plexis injury and brain damage. The judge found that the parents, Mr. and Mrs. Cruz should have been consulted and should have been informed of the option of a caesarean section and its risks. Further, he found that they should have been advised of the risks involved in proceeding with a mid-forceps delivery. Nevertheless, the trial judge concluded that had the appellants been advised and given the choice, the same result would have occurred.