To think seven Caesareans in eight years is a recipe for disaster?

[ElizabethG81]

What's happened to this woman is horrific, but surely having so many Caesareans in such a short period of time is recklessness bordering on insanity? www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3615027/Mother-eight-relives-nightmare-waking-C-section-discover-legs-amputated.html

Oooh, sensitive, Hodoooooor.

It is irresponsible to have so many children on an overpopulated planet in the first place, let alone keep getting pregnant knowing full well how dangerous having so many C-sections are. I know I'm in a tiny minority on Mumsnet, but I just can't fathom this need to pop out as many children as they fancy- what on Earth gives people a sense of entitlement to have so many mini-mes, no matter the consequences and the cost to the other taxpayers?! Not to mention it is terrible for the future of the planet, and thus those children.

I've had one naturally and having my second by elective c section due to serious complications in my first birth. This has utterly, utterly terrified me! Please tell me this is a crazy fluke situation!!

I am very sorry that that lady lost both her legs but having so many c sections is mad.
I just don't get this having so many children.
No need nowadays with all the contraceptive/ sterilisation options available.
It's probably not PC to say it but that's what I think

I'm sure the doctors are not going to cut her legs off without a seriously valid reason.

Sensitive as a fucking sledgehammer, me!

Just because herself and the Mail say that there was poor care, doesn't mean that there actually was. And just because the hospital apologised for something at some meeting, that doesn't mean they accept responsibility for the outcome in full.
Don't assume without the facts.

She wouldn't have got legal aid if she hadn't got a case
Nice to see the female to female support on here

Thats another daft assumption; sure why bother going to court at all, if anyone with legal aid must already be automatically in the right?

We don't have to support each other for absolutely everything just because we also have vaginas. We also have minds, and they are not as one.

Flagrant, selfish disregard for the overpopulation problem as well as her own health and her ability to care for the children she chose to produce. Epic fail on so many fronts, I just can't muster sympathy.

It's difficult to get legal aid though. If the hospital have been negligent in her care which has resulted in her being permanently disabled then there is a case to pursue. That's not a 'daft assumption'

Ahh, hatred and spite for a woman who has more than 2 children.

Yes it is. You've decided the hospital has been negligent because she got legal aid. But since they actually haven't been to court, or published any results of an investigation, its a very silly assumption. And its circular logic to boot!

If the hospital have been negligent in her care which has resulted in her being permanently disabled then there is a case to pursue

IF they have been hasn't been decided until AFTER the case, so you can't use your theoretical outcome as proof that there is a case to answer.

Icrackedup -
I don't have hatred and spite for anybody who has more than two children.
I think we are very lucky living in a time when we can plan our families,
when mother and baby mortality is so
much better than in the past.
I just think it was a bad decision to have SO many children by section.
I'm sure she got medical advice not to get pregnant again.
My heart goes out to her- she paid a terrible price, whoevers fault it is.

Having actually survived placenta accreta and had an emergency hysterectomy with 7 litre blood transfusion to save my life I can sympathise with this poor woman.

I am scientifically educated and read extensively into the risks before my elcs. It was still horrific and traumatic. I had ptsd and pnd afterwards.

Even with the explanation of the risks of further c sections from the doctors and the risks of an elcs with placenta accreta she may not have fully grasped the seriousness of the situation. The fact that she says she was excited says to me that she didn't realise fully the risks. I was terrified and made plans with DH of what would happen if I died before my elcs. There is no way she could have known she would wake up an amputee, it must have been awful for her.

After my cs I was in HDU unventilated for 5 days. I had special pneumatic leg compression devices on to reduce the chance of DVT. I had a nurse looking after me and 1 other patient in the room at all times. I had continuous, then half hourly, then hourly observations. Clexane injections to reduce clotting. Different hospital mind, but I find it hard to believe that nobody did observations on this lady whilst ventilated in ITU. I have been to an ITU, the patients have 1:1 care and are constantly under observation especially when ventilated. If this wasn't done then rightly the hospital is at fault. The investigation will be able to ascertain what happened from the notes. If there was an error or lapse in her care then she should be duly compensated.

I hope regardless of the outcome that she will receive lots of support.

I haven't decided the hospital have been negligent :o I have no idea if they have or haven't, which is the whole point of legal case like this it isn't it?

Then what did you mean by "She wouldn't have got legal aid if she hadn't got a case"?
As well as the other circular comment?

Hodooooooooor hospitals tend not to admit fault and apologise unless, you know - they are at fault. Unless that falls under "I don't believe what I read in the Mail" which is an entirely reasonable position if you have other sources, but you don't, do you? You are just inventing facts to suit your position, and then accusing anyone who makes that observation of "being sheep". It's hardly an intelligent position to hold. Sure, she may have made it all up about the admission and apology, but she'd be fairly stupid to do so as it would prejudice her own claim if she appeared dishonest. She has legal representation, so she'll know that.

Having said that, I don't think legal aid is available to adults for medical negligence any more, is it?

AnotherStitch I'm so sorry you went through that. It sounds horrendous.

Is arterial thrombosis more likely to occur in successive pregnancies/c-sections? If not, I don't think the situation was of her own making.

sleeponeday - hospitals tend not to admit fault and apologise unless, you know - they are at fault.

In the contrary, we would apologise on receipt of a complaint prior to any case review. The apology would be along the lines of "I'm sorry you're not happy" (not in those words) and then lead into an investigation.

Have the hospital admitted fault, other than apologising? If she really was left unmonitored for 6 hours in ITU, that is clearly negligent, but as others have said, I find it hard to believe.

The thing is, for a negligence claim it doesn't matter who the patient is or what the background is, because the patient's actions are not under scrutiny. It isn't about their actions.

The only relevant questions are: was there a failure in care so serious that no doctor would ever be willing to support it as a reasonable course of action? And if so, did an injury arise? You need both those answers to be yes to found a claim - if the hospital are lucky, a cock-up hasn't hurt anyone and so the affected party isn't entitled to anything. But this woman is minus two legs. If that was avoidable with better care, of course she deserves to be compensated. They fucked up on a basic aspect of care, and she will be paying for that for a lifetime. How she ended up in need of that care is no more relevant with her than it would be a mountaineer, or a smoker. The patient deserves competent care, end of story. Nothing else is a factor.

All the arguing over her choices is irrelevant if the injury arose because of a failure in care. If she was properly monitored and they had still needed to amputate then it would be her own lookout. But everyone has the right to competent treatment, and if they fail to get it and they are injured then they are entitled to compensation for their loss and suffering.

Slinky she is claiming that the hospital admitted the oversight (in monitoring) and apologised. That's not the pro forma "we are sorry you do not feel your care met the high standards we set ourselves" kind you would put in any letter; it's an admission. Those are not generally made lightly.

She claims that happened at a meeting with her and her partner, apparently.

Ah. Didn't see that in the article. That'll teach me to arse round on my phone when I should be reading bedtime books.

If true, that is shocking care and she should receive considerable compensation.

My Mum had all 3 of her births by cesarean, she wasn't physically capable of a natural birth.

On the 3rd one, the Dr's sterilized her, they strongly recommended she had no more children after the 3rd (which suited her down to the ground, as she actually only planned on 2 children)