In March 2003 Lucy gave birth to her first child. Pryers helped her to claim compensation after the hospital mismanaged the birth.
After the birth of her child, in 2003, a doctor tried to remove the placenta manually, but the cord became separated from the placenta, and it had to be removed in pieces manually.
Lucy started to recover and was discharged three days after giving birth, but continued to suffer ‘flu type symptoms and continued to bleed from her vagina.
At the start of April 2003 Lucy contacted her GP as she had passed a large blood clot. She was immediately referred to hospital and an ultrasound there confirmed the presence of pieces of the placenta in her womb.
The following day Lucy underwent surgery to remove the pieces of placenta. However, during the procedure the base layer of the endometrium was removed causing a condition called Asherman’s syndrome. This prevented Lucy from having periods and made the chances of future conception very unlikely.
Fortunately Lucy did conceive and gave birth to her second child in September 2009, although she had been unable to plan this pregnancy.
Pryers helped Lucy to claim compensation
Lucy contacted Pryers in July 2006 to investigate her claim and Alex McKnight, as specialist in medical negligence claims handled her case. She entered into a ‘no win no fee’ agreement to fund the case.
Prior to the second pregnancy the Defendant agreed that Lucy was suffering from Asherman’s Syndrome. However, following the second pregnancy they stated that this was an incorrect diagnosis and that in the alternative if the diagnosis was correct, the cause was a pelvic infection, rather than the consequences of any negligence.
We obtained expert evidence which was supportive, but the Defendant’s expert disagreed on almost every point.
The matter was listed to go to trial in February 2011, however, in December 2010 an offer was received from the Defendant to settle Lucy’s compensation and our costs.
Lucy received £7,500 in damages to cover the pain and suffering and the subsequent difficulties in family planning in addition to the Defendant paying our costs so she did not have anything to pay and received 100% of her compensation.