The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this birth injury case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, U.C. Davis Medical Center, Mercy, or Sutter.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)
DEFENDANTS ELIZABETH BROWN, M.D., STANLEY WOO, M.D., AND WOMEN’S HEALTH GROUP’S TRIAL BRIEF (PRE-TRIAL REPORT)
INTRODUCTION
The instant action is one for medical malpractice, wrongful life and wrongful birth brought on behalf of the plaintiffs, Nancy Smith, Thomas Smith, and minor plaintiff Nicholas Smith, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Nancy Smith, for the failure to diagnose multiple congenital anomalies prenatally during ultrasounds performed on July 21, 2008, by defendant Stanley Woo, M.D., and August 11, 2008, by defendant Elizabeth Brown, M.D.
Plaintiffs allege that Drs. Woo and Brown failed to properly perform the ultrasounds by failing to obtain measurements. Plaintiffs allege that had the congenital anomaly that the plaintiff Nicholas Smith was born with, known as hemimeganencephaly, been diagnosed, plaintiffs Nancy Smith and Thomas Smith would have aborted the pregnancy and the minor plaintiff Nicholas Smith would not have been born. For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
The evidence will show that both Dr. Woo and Dr. Brown met the standard of care regarding the ultrasounds performed, both of which were limited ultrasounds and they were not required to evaluate the anatomy of the baby.
The undisputed evidence will be that there was no medical indication for an anatomic, or structural ultrasound, or other more extensive testing, in this low risk pregnancy. There was therefore no indication for referral to a high risk specialist any time during the pregnancy. Further, the evidence will show that the child’s congenital anomaly, hemimeganencephaly, would not have been diagnosable to a reasonable degree of medical probability at a point in time when the plaintiff Nancy Smith could have had a legal abortion in California. (See Part 2 of 8.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.