WOMAN’S DEATH IN HOSPITAL: DAMAGES CLAIM

Greymouth Evening Star, 14 August 1950, Page 2

WOMAN’S DEATH IN HOSPITAL: DAMAGES CLAIM

HAMILTON, This Day (P.A.).— Claiming £5500 general damages and £57 special damages, Vivian Frank Smith, a farm worker, of Taumarunui, brought an action against the Taumarunui Hospital Board, the first defendant, and James Marshall Stewart, a medical practitioner, the second defendant, before Mr Justice Finlay and a special jury at Hamilton today. The claim was brought under the Deaths by ( Accidents Compensation Act. ' •, , 4 The statement of claim said that, the plaintiff was the widower of Mary Phyllis Smith, a woman, aged 28 years, who died at Taumarunui on February 27. They were married nine years ago and there were four children. About 9 a.m. on February 27 an operation for dilatation and curettage was performed upon the deceased at the Taumarunui Hospital by Dr Stewart, said the statement of claim. It alleged that during the course of the operation Dr Stewart severely injured the deceased’s cervix and perforated the fundus of her uterus.

Neglect Alleged It is alleged that in the hospital ward on the same day she died from haemorrhage due to injuries. It is alleged that the death of Mrs Smith was due to the negligent acts and omissions of the first and second defendants and other servants of the first defendant, acting in the course of their employment, in that the whole of the cervix and part of the interior wall of the uterus were completely torn apart by a surgical instrument. It is also alleged that no remedial measures were immediately taken, although it was known, or should have been known, that severe injuries had been inflicted. It is also alleged by 'the plaintiff that the deceased was returned from the operating theatre to the ward in a dangerous condition; that no proper or adequate instructions were given as to the required care, supervision, and treatment; and that no proper or adequate care, supervision, and treatment were at any time given in the ward. The allegation is made that the deceased’s rapidly-deteriorating condition was not observed or appreciated, that no effective steps were taken to save her life until she was beyond medical aid, and that there was at all times a failure to exercise the medical care, skill, and knowledge required in the performance of the operation and in the subsequent treatment. Husband’s Evidence The first witness was the plaintiff, who described his wife’s health. He said she was perfectly fit. ‘He stated that two of the children were now with his mother-in-law and two with a sister. He was contributing to their upkeep, but, if he could afford a housekeeper, he would like to have the children with him. . A housekeeper would cost him between £4 and £4- 10s a week, plus keep. Gwendoline Joyce Bell, theatre sister at the Taumarunui Hospital, said she was on duty in the theatre on the day of the operation, rhe condition of the patient on entering the theatre was normal.