Coroner: Baby’s death at NHS Trust due to neglect

A baby who died from a brain injury following a delayed labour and delivery was failed by staff at Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Trust, a Coroner has concluded.

Arlo River Phoenix Lambert died on 9 March 2023 at Kingsmill Hospital, Nottinghamshire, at five days old. The Coroner found that Arlo’s death was “contributed to by mismanagement of labour and multiple missed opportunities to have expedited his delivery.”

She concluded that neglect contributed to Arlo’s death, which came from “a failure to follow Trust guidance.”

Miss Lambert, Arlo’s mother, was induced at 40+2 weeks, and following spontaneous rupture of membranes (SROM), she was left for 17 hours without any attempts made to progress her labour.  The Coroner found that this allowed the risk of infection to materialise. During that time, staff failed to properly review Miss Lambert’s care plan and discuss modes of delivery with her when concerns were raised about the position of the baby and her labour was failing to progress.

Coroners findings on contributing factors

The Coroner concluded that neglect contributed to Arlo’s death, citing a “failure to follow Trust guidance.”

Miss Lambert, Arlo’s mother, was induced at 40+2 weeks. After a spontaneous rupture of membranes (SROM), she was left for 17 hours without attempts to progress her labour. The Coroner found that this delay allowed the risk of infection to materialise. Staff also failed to properly review her care plan or discuss delivery options when concerns arose about the baby’s position and the lack of labour progression.

Missed opportunities and preventable death

The Coroner identified “multiple missed opportunities to have expedited Arlo’s delivery, which would probably have prevented his death.” A Prevention of Future Deaths Report has been issued.

Since Arlo’s death, Miss Lambert has experienced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Complaint against specialist registrar

Additionally, the Coroner made a complaint to the General Medical Council regarding the actions of Specialist Registrar Dr Adeyemi. In oral evidence, he stated that he would “cross [my] fingers behind my back and hope and pray the mother would go into labour” rather than implementing an appropriate care plan.

Evidence of brain injury

A post-mortem autopsy confirmed that Arlo’s brain had suffered a hypoxic-ischaemic injury, caused by a lack of adequate oxygenated blood supply. This was attributed to the delayed delivery following fetal distress.

Failings in antenatal and labour care

The Coroner found significant issues in Miss Lambert’s care between her induction of labour on 2 March 2023 and Arlo’s birth on 4 March 2023.

Antenatal failings

At 38+6 weeks gestation, Miss Lambert underwent a growth scan and was offered induction at 40+2 weeks due to concerns about fetal growth. However, the Coroner concluded that this decision was outside national guidelines, and Miss Lambert was not informed that the induction was unnecessary. The Coroner stated that she would likely have gone into spontaneous labour without complications.

Labour management failures

Upon Miss Lambert’s admission, numerous delays in commencing the induction occurred, exacerbated by poor communication and staff shortages.

At 11:33 on 3 March, a high fetal head position was noted, presenting a missed opportunity to consider a delivery plan. Additionally, the decision to discontinue CTG monitoring, against national guidance, prevented the detection of fetal distress.

By 17:00, Dr Adeyemi formulated a delivery plan without consulting Miss Lambert, reviewing her records, or considering her preferences.

The Coroner concluded that had the Trust’s induction of labour policy been followed, and delivery occurred within two hours of SROM, Arlo’s death could have been avoided.

Delayed caesarean section and birth complications

At 21:43, a further opportunity was missed when blood-stained liquor was reported. A lack of communication between the midwife and obstetric team meant that the mode of delivery was not reconsidered.

Doctors eventually opted for a category 1 caesarean section at 03:58 on 4 March, following concerns of placental abruption. At 04:26, Arlo was delivered via a difficult caesarean, with evidence of a placental abruption. Despite specialist care at the Queen’s Medical Centre, he died five days later.

Specific failings identified by the Coroner

The Coroner outlined the following key failings:

  • Failure to follow the Trust’s induction policy.
  • Inadequate monitoring of fetal distress.
  • Poor communication and staff shortages.
  • Lack of consideration for Miss Lambert’s informed consent.

Had Arlo been delivered sooner, the Coroner concluded that he “would more likely than not have survived.”

Calls for maternity care reform

Following a series of high-profile scandals, NHS Trusts face mounting pressure to improve maternity care. A recent Birth Trauma Inquiry condemned poor maternity and postnatal care as “tolerated as normal,” calling for systemic reform.

Family’s response and legal representation

Chantae Clark of Tees Law, representing the family, stated:

“These tragic events were preventable if Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Trust had followed the guidance and acted on the warning signs in the hours before Miss Lambert’s labour. It is hard to believe that in such an advanced healthcare system, a mother should suffer the treatment that she did and that a baby should die because of neglect.”

She emphasised the emotional toll on Arlo’s family and expressed hope that the Coroner’s findings and Prevention of Future Deaths Report will lead to meaningful changes in NHS maternity care.

Caesarean Section Requests

A report on the variations in practice and procedure across NHS Trusts in the UK

At Tees, we are increasingly supporting women who, despite requesting a caesarean section or raising concerns about vaginal delivery, have been counselled in a way that steers them toward a vaginal birth.

Many of these women are unaware that nearly 40% of births in the UK involve either instrumental assistance or a caesarean section. For first-time mothers, this figure rises to 50%. Furthermore, around 4% of women experience third or fourth-degree perineal tears during childbirth, which can result in life-changing, long-term issues with bowel control and incontinence.

Sadly, many go on to endure traumatic births, often leading to serious and lasting physical and/or mental health problems. In some cases, their babies also suffer injury.

Read Tees Law’s own report

The copyright in this report belongs to Tees Law. Tees Law gives permission for extracts from the report to be used provided a suitable credit to Tees Law is given and a link to the full report published.

In 2018, Birthrights  – a charity dedicated to promoting women’s rights in childbirth, published a report into Maternal Request Caesarean (MRCS). These are planned caesarean sections requested by pregnant women without a medical indication.

The report revealed that, despite NICE Guideline CG132, nearly 75% of NHS Trusts did not have written policies supporting a woman’s right to choose a caesarean.

It concluded that “the majority of Trusts in the UK made the process of requesting a caesarean lengthy, difficult or inconsistent, adding anxiety and distress to women at a vulnerable time.” The report called for greater transparency around the variation in policies and procedures between NHS Trusts.

Three years have passed since the Birthrights report was published. With no further research on this issue that we were aware of—and with our Medical Negligence team continuing to support women like Niamh and Anna, who have faced disempowerment and difficulty when giving birth—we undertook our own investigation in May 2021. Our goal was to assess whether practices and procedures regarding MRCS had changed across NHS Trusts since 2018.

 

Trust failed to advise woman on risks and benefits of vaginal delivery vs. caesarean

Ensuring informed birth choices: The importance of understanding risks.

Childbirth is a significant life event, and while most experiences are positive, complications can arise. Informed decision-making during the antenatal period is crucial to ensure the safety and well-being of both mother and baby.

The need for informed choices

Expectant mothers should receive comprehensive, unbiased information about the potential risks and benefits of various birthing options, including Caesarean sections, vaginal births, and other interventions. This empowers them to make decisions aligned with their individual health needs and preferences.

However, in practice, the risks of vaginal births are often underrepresented compared to those of Caesarean sections. Many women remain unaware that in the UK:

  • Nearly 40% of women undergo instrumental delivery or Caesarean section.
  • 50% of first-time mothers experience these interventions.
  • 4% of women suffer third or fourth-degree tears, leading to long-term bowel control issues and incontinence.

Lack of comprehensive counseling

At Tees Law, our Medical Negligence team has supported numerous women who faced traumatic childbirth experiences. Despite expressing concerns or requesting a Caesarean section, some were advised against it without a full understanding of the risks of vaginal delivery.

Anna’s story: A preventable trauma

In 2018, Anna (not her real name) suffered a third-degree tear during vaginal birth. Despite having pre-existing bowel difficulties, including slow transit and severe constipation, her concerns about vaginal delivery were repeatedly dismissed. Her visual impairment added to her vulnerability.

Missed opportunities

Throughout her pregnancy, Anna consistently raised concerns:

  • She was advised to stop taking stimulant laxatives without thorough discussions on alternative options.
  • Her repeated questions about Caesarean delivery were met with reassurances that vaginal birth was “safest for the baby.”
  • Risks associated with vaginal delivery were not communicated, despite her history of bowel issues.

When her baby was positioned “back-to-back,” increasing delivery risks, she was still discouraged from a Caesarean.

Traumatic delivery and lasting impact

Anna endured two days of contractions, leading to an instrumental delivery using forceps without an episiotomy. Following the birth, she was informed of her third-degree tear and its consequences, which severely impacted her quality of life.

Despite her long-standing bowel condition, appropriate postnatal care and medication were delayed. She continues to experience bowel urgency, incontinence, and symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

The fight for justice

Anna’s experience is not isolated. NICE guidelines state that if a vaginal birth remains unacceptable to a mother after counseling, a Caesarean section should be offered. However, a 2018 Birthrights report revealed that only 26% of Trusts adhered to this best-practice guidance.

At Tees Law, we are committed to holding healthcare providers accountable for failures in maternal care. Our experienced Medical Negligence solicitors support clients in pursuing justice, ensuring their voices are heard and their rights upheld.

Contact us

If you or someone you know has experienced medical negligence during childbirth, our dedicated team is here to help. Reach out to Tees Law today for expert legal support and compassionate guidance.

 

Woman suffers severe injuries and PTSD after denied caesarean request

Most women who give birth vaginally do so safely and without any long-term health issues. However, according to NHS data, around 4% of women suffer third- or fourth-degree tears during childbirth. In some cases, complications can result in severe and life-changing maternal injuries.

Sadly, Tees Law’s specialist Medical Negligence team knows only too well the devastating impact of such cases. One example is Niamh who experienced a third-degree tear following a vaginal birth. This was despite Niamh having expressed a preference for planned caesarean section. Her claim against Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust is based on breaches of duty before, during and after delivery.

Lack of informed consent

Niamh became pregnant in early 2018.

At 16 weeks, she met with a male registrar and explained that she expected she would need to have a C-section because all the women in her family had given birth that way. In addition to her family history, Niamh’s very slight build further suggested that C-section would be the best method to deliver her baby. Niamh recalls: “the registrar looked me in the eye and said that ‘we would very much support a vaginal birth at this stage’. lt felt to me from the outset like it was going to be a battle to get a c-section and that I was being told that I didn’t need one, despite my family history. To be told so early on that I would need to have a vaginal delivery, made me really anxious.”

Later on at her booking appointment, Niamh also explained her family history of c-sections to the midwife. The midwife referred Niamh to Birth Options to discuss the mode of delivery. There, she was told that a vaginal birth would be much better for the baby. She was also informed that a vaginal birth would allow her to get back to her daily routine sooner. Additionally, she was warned of the risks of having a C-section, including the potential to lose a lot of blood.

Throughout the antenatal process, Niamh repeatedly asked about having a C-section. At 26 weeks, it was noted that she felt “very anxious about [the] birth and uncomfortable within the hospital”. She expressed doubts about her ability to give birth vaginally but was nevertheless encouraged to pursue this route. In the end, based on the medical assurances she had received, Niamh agreed to proceed with a vaginal birth.

An assisted delivery

A week before Niamh went into labour, an ultrasound scan revealed that her baby was back-to-back, a position that increases the risk of complications during delivery. At this point, Niamh asked again if this meant she should have a C-section. She was told that the baby would likely turn around and there would be no problem.

In October 2018, Niamh went into labour spontaneously at 40 weeks. The baby remained back-to-back, and Niamh could not deliver so she was taken to theatre for assisted delivery. A C-section was not offered to Niamh. Instead, the baby was delivered after three pulls of the ventouse and four pulls of the forceps. Her daughter, Darcey, was born safely, but the instrumental delivery caused Niamh to sustain a Grade 3 tear, along with significant and irreparable muscle damage.

Postnatal negligence

Niamh bled heavily for 16 days after giving birth. She suffered faecal urge symptoms and abdominal distension, and her haemoglobin levels fell to 52 grams per litre. On day 5, she was given an X-ray but was refused a CT or MRI scan. The X-ray didn’t reveal anything and despite her symptoms, Niamh was told there was nothing untoward. Niamh pressed for a CT or MRI scan but continued to be refused. Finally on day 9, after having to wait a full weekend and only after continuing to press further, an ultrasound was performed, which failed to detect any medical issue.

Finally, a CT scan was arranged and Niamh was subsequently diagnosed with a pelvic haematoma requiring surgery.

After this, she was unable to pass urine. Several attempts at trial without catheter failed, but instead of being referred to uro-gynaecology, she was discharged with a catheter.

Niamh was in and out of hospital several times during November 2018 to attempt a trial without catheter (TWOC). Eventually, Niamh sought her own private consultant and on the consultant’s medical advice, went back to the NHS to request a suprapubic catheter.

Niamh was re-admitted in late November 2018 and underwent further surgery to insert the suprapubic catheter into her stomach, a procedure which she found extremely distressing.

Niamh’s catheter was not removed until the start of January 2019. During this time, she experienced coccyx, groin and deep pelvic pain, as well as faecal urgency. Since then, Niamh has continued to suffer from psychiatric injury. She has been diagnosed with PTSD and also suffers chronic coccyx pain, which causes her to wake up in pain. She also suffers urgency of continence and has not been able to return to work.

Failures at every stage

There were medical failures at every stage in Niamh’s story. In antenatal meetings, she was not properly counselled as to the pros and cons of C-section compared to vaginal delivery. Having expressed concern regarding the risks of giving birth vaginally, specifically in relation to her family history of C-sections, Niamh was assured that this was the best method of delivery. At no point was she presented with a balanced picture of the benefits and risks of each option. If she had been warned of the risks associated with vaginal delivery, she would have chosen a C-section.

Although she knew there was a small risk she could tear, Niamh was not warned this could lead to difficulties with continence. Moreover, she was warned of the dangers of C-section and the potential disruption this could cause to her recovery, but she was not provided with an equivalent risk assessment of vaginal delivery. For example, she was informed that she could suffer excessive bleeding with a C-section but was never told that this could also happen with a vaginal delivery. Niamh was also not informed about the risk of requiring instrumental assistance.

During labour, there was an opportunity to perform a C-section yet Niamh was not offered the option of a C-section. Furthermore, once assisted delivery with ventouse and forceps had been chosen, there was a failure to manage the delivery in such a way as to avoid the tear.

Finally, Niamh experienced negligent postnatal treatment. There was a delay in escalation, imaging, identification and treatment of the haematoma. Had the haematoma been diagnosed and treated earlier, the extent of the infection would have been less severe. Because of the failure to treat in a timely manner, her episiotomy wound broke down twice and wasn’t able to heal properly which has resulted in the formation of extremely painful scar tissue.

An all-too-common problem

Ultimately, had Niamh been able to go ahead with her preference for a planned C-section, she would have avoided the third-degree tear, haematoma and the rest of the consequences that have resulted from her instrumental delivery. Unfortunately, Niamh is not alone in suffering injury and long-term complications from a vaginal birth that should have been avoided.

Official NICE guidelines state: “For women requesting a caesarean section, if after discussion and offer of support… a vaginal birth is still not an acceptable option [Trusts should] offer a planned caesarean section.” Yet a report by Birthrights in 2018 revealed that only 26% of Trusts offered C-sections in line with NICE best-practice guidance.

Here to help

Our Medical Negligence solicitors are devoted to achieving the justice our clients deserve. If you have been affected by medical negligence, we can support you on your journey to justice, looking out for your needs and priorities every step of the way.

£575,000 pre-trial settlement for child left with cerebral palsy as a result of poor management during labour

Tees secured a £575,000 settlement for HC, a child who suffers from mild motor, learning, and cognitive impairment as a result of medical negligence during her birth.

Background: A normal pregnancy with unexpected complications

HC was born in 1985. Her mother, MC, experienced a normal pregnancy, except for a urinary tract infection at 24 weeks, which was treated without further complications.

At 34 weeks, MC was admitted to West Suffolk Hospital after experiencing irregular contractions. Medical staff monitored her using cardiotocography (CTG) to track the baby’s heart rate and contractions, initially reporting normal and reassuring results.

Signs of distress and delayed intervention

As MC’s contractions continued, her discomfort increased. A midwife detected signs of bradycardia, indicating an abnormally slow heart rate. A doctor assessed MC and observed a further slowing of the baby’s heartbeat. Concerned but uncertain of the cause, the doctor requested a consultant’s review.

Upon examination, the consultant suspected a concealed haemorrhage and ordered an emergency caesarean section. Tragically, HC’s heart rate had become undetectable five minutes before delivery. After birth, HC was unable to breathe independently for approximately 30 minutes and was transferred to Addenbrooke’s Hospital for intensive care.

Lasting impact of medical negligence

Due to the trauma and oxygen deprivation at birth, HC, now in her 30s, experiences mild motor impairment, learning difficulties, cognitive challenges, and some communication problems.

Investigating the claim: Overcoming challenges

Tees began investigating HC’s case in 2000 when she was 15 years old. The delay between her birth and the investigation posed additional challenges. Our dedicated birth injury legal team worked diligently to obtain and analyze her medical records, which were released gradually by the hospital.

Upon thorough review, we identified critical concerns regarding the management of MC’s labour. Our investigation focused on whether HC’s brain damage could have been prevented had she been delivered earlier through an emergency caesarean section.

Establishing liability and securing compensation

Initially, the hospital contested liability, denying any wrongdoing. However, Tees collaborated with expert witnesses to present detailed evidence on the negligent management of HC’s delivery.

In 2008, after extensive negotiations, the case was settled out of court, avoiding the expense and stress of a trial. HC received a £575,000 settlement, which was placed into a Personal Injury Trust to safeguard her future entitlement to means-tested benefits.

Legal insight from Tees

Janine Collier, Executive Partner and Head of Medical Negligence at Tees, commented on the case:

“In this case, our perseverance paid off. Despite the significant amount of time between HC’s birth and our investigation, we were able to identify clear evidence of negligence. The hospital missed opportunities to recognize that HC was experiencing oxygen deprivation, and an earlier caesarean section could have prevented her brain damage. The settlement will help HC access the support and resources she needs for her future.”

How Tees can help you

If you or a loved one has experienced birth injuries due to medical negligence, Tees’ specialist medical negligence solicitors can provide expert legal support. We are committed to securing the compensation and answers you deserve.

Contact Tees today to speak with one of our compassionate legal professionals.

* Client names have been changed to protect their privacy.