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

Gileswithachainsaw, how did she know the checks werent done if she was in a coma?

starutopia are you serious?!

The NHS have done something wrong. Thrombosis tales time to get to the stage that it requires amputation.

Yes. The blood loss led to the coma. From what she has been told, the poor management of the coma led to the amputation. The latter part is what she is angry about.

I think she is an absolute idiot to of taken the risk of so many unnecessary sections. She put herself in that position and she should take the blame

It seems though the hospital have admitted short comings so will end up probably paying out a hefty sum

presumably it's on her notes and/or family were there and witnessed the orders fir these checks and the failure to carry them.out.

either that or the hospital.admitted it.

I was told that I would require regular checks due to my pregnancy complications. the reality was the only one who spoke to me.was the frickin dinner lady...

What a fucking nasty thread.

Grand multiparity = DVT risk factor
Raised BMI = DVT risk factor
Operative procedure = DVT risk factor
Repeated CS = risk factor for placenta accreta

If she hadnt' had a lot of (ill advised) caesarean sections she would have been less likely to have placenta accreta which is SO much more serious than placenta previa. The placenta accreta led to torrential haemorrhage which would have led to her clotting factors being so deranged, this would have definitely been a massive risk factor for DVT on top of the ones she already had.

It's bad luck on top of a lot of 'it won't happen to me' and not taking in the reality of the consequences of choices. But at least she is alive. It could easily have been different. Hard to think like that I know and I do have compassion for her... but read her words; she clearly had no clue of the seriousness of the situation. If I was diagnosed with accreta I'd be shitting myself and making a will, and nowhere near as blasé as she seems to have been.

shazza her notes maybe?? The ones you can request copies of.....

memyselfandaye, what because people have different views from you? and people think its ok to sue the national health service for stupid amounts?????

Her actions led to the coma, if you want to be simplistic. Their actions led to the life altering damage. Too bloody right she is cross, it is their job to take care of her regardless of how she got there. Otherwise do we turn away and scorn the obese? Smokers? People who speed and have an accident? Or is our scorn saved for those with multiple children called something like Winter Rose?

Her life has been massively changed for the worse. If the actions, or lack of action on the part of the hospital caused that they should pay.

and make sure she gets sterlised before this happens again.

1. she had an emergency hysterectomy. Thats what caused the coma to be necessary.
2. she cant lose her legs again.

shazza, are you being deliberately obtuse? Yes, she knew some risks. What she didn't know was the risk that they would leave her for hours without checking for thrombosis. It's a basic medical check that should be performed on all patients after surgery, and it's got nothing whatsoever with the fact that she'd had Caesarians previously.

She will have read her notes (they will detail every intervention, including checks) and it seems the hospital did feel it had something to apologise for.
There's a lot of judgement on this thread. For sure, the woman took risks I would not take but she should still expect to receive a decent standard of health care. Folk do all sorts of things I would not do because I consider the risks too high (horse riding, motorbike riding, skiing, diving, etc.) but they all still have a right to a decent standard of healthcare if it goes belly-up. It sounds like it will come to light whether she did or did not and if she did not (receive the decent standard of care) I hope she is well compensated so she can look after babies properly.

shazza, did you not see the bit where the hospital admitted they hadn't done the checks whilst she was in a coma?

AugustaFinkNottle , how do you know she diddnt know the risk? how do you know they left her for hours? have you read the case? how do you know the medical checks werent done? your only going of the paper and thats it.

A mother has lost her legs, her life and her children's lives are changed forever... Where's the compassion??

And smoking! I smoked in my teens but gave it up after a couple of years because I worried about cancer but boy oh boy I LOVED to smoke and still miss it. I expect smokers to get a decent standard of healthcare, even thought they take risks I don't, though I am fat so I guess it's even-Stevens.

I think it's worth remembering too that the hospital won have put this story out there. The fact that it's in the mail will be down the patient. She'd put her story out there, not surprising people comment on it.

I'm amazed they let her have so many sections. Why couldn't she just have natural births (much safer)

Um, what? VB isn't 'much safer' than even one ELCS. Once you've had a certain number of sections, attempting VB becomes less and less safe. It was particularly not safe for baby number seven, given that she had placenta previa.

And as others have pointed out, it's not really about 'letting'. If a woman gets pregnant, the baby has to come out somehow, and if a section is the safest way which it clearly was after the first few, it would be unethical not to perform one. She's almost certainly had more sections than she's been advised is safe, but I'm not sure what you expected the doctors to do when she rocked up with number seven. VBA5C?!

she should thank her lucky stars and make sure she gets sterlised before this happens again

You really haven't bothered to read anything, shazza, have you? Why do you think she needs to be sterilised when she's had a hysterectomy? Why would you be so judgmental when you haven't made the slightest effort to understand the facts?

No shazzarooney because what is the point of kicking someone when they are down?

Starting a thread about someone who has lost their legs purely to say it was her own fault and the OP diagnosing her as insane fucking stinks.

I can well believe she wasnt checked as as she should have been. When I was in hospital during pregnancy due to a suspected blood clot on my lungs, I dont remember dealing with that many doctors or midwives.

The hospital has admitted to failings post op. THAT is the issue here. If they hadn't failed her, she wouldn't be in this dreadful position.

I agree with the couple of posters who are astounded by the harshness of these posts & lack of compassion.

FGS the woman has lost both her lower legs because the hospital fucked up and because she has 8 kids you want to pull her apart. Jesus wept.

Yes, it's not wise to have more than two or three c sections, but one of the listed risks is NOT the hospital failing to follow the correct procedure.