Induced Into Harm: When Doctors and Hospitals Betray Mother and Child

Monica Cerna’s cry in the delivery room still echoes six years later. Her daughter Ka’Mya was born unresponsive after hours of medically induced labor, a procedure that was never full explained to her. Ka’Mya now lives with cerebral palsy.

This article examines what went wrong and what legal options exist for families when birth interventions result in life-altering harm.

A Preventable Tragedy: Ka’Mya’s Case

Ka’Myra was born on Nov. 27, 2018. Prenatal monitoring confirmed she was healthy before labor induction, Patterson’s Beam Legal Team said in a press release following the Feb. 10 verdict.

Hours into induced labor, Monica Cerna required an emergency C-section. Her baby was not breathing, with only a faint pulse, and was immediately rushed to the NICU and later transferred to Children’s Hospital for specialized care.

A trial jury later awarded the family $10.2 million, finding the doctors at Ascension All Saints Hospital were negligent in administering high doses of the drug Pitocin.

Brain scans before birth and after delivery proved the life-altering damage occurred during labor.

Attorney Michael Patterson, of the Chicago-based Beam Legal Team, was quoted in the online Lawsuits site that the “relatively high dose” of Pitocin “caused too many contractions, which occurred for many hours.” Contractions that ultimately deprived Ka’Mya of oxygen.

Monica told the trial jury that she was confused and distressed when separated from her newborn after the birth.

“So, I asked, ‘Where is my baby? Why can’t I hear her,’” she recalled. Only later, when she viewed the brain scans, did she begin to understand the extent of her daughter’s injuries.

A $10.2 Million Judgment

The trial lasted three weeks. After 10 hours of deliberation, the jury found Ascension All Saints, Dr. Christina Sullivan and an obstetric nurse guilty of negligence. The verdict was clear: they had administered excessive amounts of Pitocin and failed to intervene in time.

The frequency and intensity of the contractions cut off oxygen to Ka’Mya during labor, “causing preventable brain injury,” the Beam release states. The suit also claimed that the doctor and nurse continued to administer Pitocin – which Patterson calls the “opioid of obstetrics” – for at least two hours longer than standards of care mandate.

“Ka’Mya suffers from cerebral palsy and permanent disability,” the firm stated in the release.

The law firm pulled no punches in castigating the hospital, doctor, nurse, insurance company “and so-called Injured Patients and Families Compensation Fund” for refusing to accept responsibility. Instead, they argued the injuries occurred before Cerna arrived at the hospital– a claim the jury rejected.

Patterson praised the 12 jurors “who sacrificed three weeks of their time, debated the issues, found the truth and did justice on behalf of Ka’Mya.”

He also emphasized the long-term impact of the award.

“The damages awarded will be used to provide for Ka’Mya’s medical care needs in the future, which are extensive,” Patterson said. “The irony is that this money will be spent directly back to the healthcare industry over Ka’Mya’s lifetime.”

Today, Ka’Mya is mostly non-verbal and is learning American Sign Language. “She can give high fives – small victories in a life permanently altered by medical negligence,” Lawsuits reported.

“It’s an emotional thing for me to speak of because I love her, and I wouldn’t change her,” Cerna testified in court. “I mean, I want her to have a normal life, but yeah,” she added, her voice trailing off.

Patterson called the case “totally preventable, and it’s not anybody trying to hurt anybody else. It’s truly carelessness, negligence.”

When Consent Isn’t Really Consent

Signing a waiver before a medical procedure does not absolve a doctor from legal responsibility for negligence. While release forms list possible adverse outcomes, many patients accept the doctor’s recommendation and just sign on the dotted line.

If a physician fails to properly explain the possible negative effects of a procedure or whether the procedure is even necessary, then there is no true “informed consent.” Administering too much or too little medication, or making other preventable mistakes during the procedure, may constitute negligence under the law.

In Ka’Mya’s case, Cema testified that she never consented to the use of the drug that caused the birth injury and remained confused throughout the labor process.

“They weren’t telling me what was going on as much as they should have,” she said in interviews with Lawsuits and ABC7.

Unfortunately, many women who have endured this type of malpractice either do not know their rights, can’t afford to hire an attorney, or are discouraged from pursuing a lawsuit because of the low success rate for malpractice claims.

Patterson said the Cerna judgment was notable because it occurred in Wisconsin, where 91 percent of malpractice decisions are in favor of the medical providers.

Why Malpractice is So Hard to Win

Medical malpractice cases are among the most difficult-to-win cases. Jason Harr of the Harr Law Firm told The Daily Muck that recent tort reform legislation in Florida has made an already uphill battle even steeper.

“There are law firms who stopped taking malpractice cases because of the drastic impact from that tort reform,” Harr said.

“I can only speak about the impact on Florida, not in other states,” The Daytona Beach lawyer noted. “However, one thing I can say for surety for anyone is that if you or a loved one believes you are the victim of medical malpractice, reach out to a legal expert to discuss your options.”

According to the firm’s research and U.S. Department of Justice data:

• 61% of malpractice claims are settled out of court.
• Of the 39% that go to trial, plaintiffs win about 37% of the time.
• Median jury awards hover around $600,000.

Harr stressed that mistakes during treatment or surgery do not automatically qualify as malpractice.

“Juries generally recognize this and acknowledge that a doctor can do everything right, and a patient can still suffer from a negative outcome,” he said. “There are no guarantees in the world of medicine.”

To prevail, plaintiffs must prove that the provider made an obvious, avoidable error– and that the mistake directly caused harm. This often requires expert witnesses who can clearly explain what went wrong and how it could have been avoided.

“Courts won’t punish a surgeon for an honest mistake,” the Harr Law website states. You must be able to prove that they failed to perform their duty as a medical care provider in some way.”

Even when plaintiffs win, collecting compensation can be a challenge. A Justice Department study found that many malpractice cases decided in favor of the plaintiff were later closed without the claimant receiving any financial award.

What Lawyers Say

Many law firms that specialize in birth injury and medical negligence emphasize the risks of improperly used labor induction.

“Under ideal circumstances, a woman will go into labor when her baby and her body tell her she is ready,” states the Chicago-based Salvi Schostok & Pritchard. “However, in some situations, labor may need to be induced prior to the time when it would begin naturally.

The firm explains that induction involves using medical devices or medication to prepare the cervix and trigger uterine contractions. When used appropriately, induction can save lives. But, they caution, “doctors are sometimes negligent in their decision to induce labor. This puts the mother and baby at risk.”

The Kuhlman Law Office in Spokane, Wash., cites data showing that 25 percent of first-time mothers require labor induction and 75 percent can have a natural labor. The American Journal of Maternal and Child Nursing reported in July/August 2022 that approximately 31.37 percent of all U.S. births were induced in 2020. That is more than triple the rate in 1989.

SS&P said doctor-related non-medical reasons for inducing labor include “to deliver a baby at a convenient time or before he goes out of town; as a result of a misdiagnosis of a health issue in either the mother or child; to obtain a larger insurance payout or greater payments for medical care.

“In any situation where a doctor induces labor with no legitimate medical reason to do so, the doctor can be considered negligent,” the law firm says. “A doctor is negligent and liable for malpractice if no reasonable physician in his/her position would have made the same decision on induction.”

Kuhlman Law’s fact sheet on this issue notes there is no issue “with the use of induction techniques when needed.” However, the law firm says when complications for the mother or baby occur due to inappropriate use of the techniques or there is no medical reason for the procedure, “it is considered to be medical malpractice.”

Readers considering possible legal action due to induction-related injuries should contact a local attorney who is knowledgeable in the malpractice laws of their state.

Your Choice or Your Doctor’s?

Several reports indicate that doctors often recommend the procedure to control when labor occurs to avoid scheduling conflicts in their practice and the hospital’s.

A 2016 study in California found that 40 percent of women said their doctor recommended inducing early labor, according to Evidence Based Birth. This was before the 2018 ARRIVE study, which provoked a dramatic spike in scheduled inductions.

The Mayo Clinic states that it is “important that you and your healthcare professional share in the decision to induce labor at 39 to 40 weeks.” Women should ask questions about the risks and not blindly trust the doctor’s advice.

Mayo says those risks include:

• Failed induction. If induction does not result in delivery after 24 hours, a C-section might be needed.
• Low fetal heart rate. Medicines that induce labor can cause too many or extremely hard contractions. This can reduce the baby’s oxygen supply and affect the baby’s heart rate.
• Infection. Methods, such as rupturing the membranes, can increase the risk of infection for the mother and baby.
• Uterine rupture. This rare but serious complication occurs when the uterus tears along the scar line from a previous C-section or surgery. A rupture requires an emergency C-section to prevent life-threatening complications. It can also require a hysterectomy – the removal of the uterus, rendering the woman unable to have children.
• Post-delivery bleeding. Labor induction can cause the uterine muscles not to contract after the delivery. This condition can cause serious bleeding after a baby is born.

“It is becoming unusual for a woman to get through her pregnancy without being recommended to induce her labor,” Dr. Rachel Reed, an author and retired midwife in Queensland, Australia, told The Daily Muck in the May 17 article.

A Last Resort, Not a First Response

There is no disagreement on the fact that inducing labor can save lives when there is a medical emergency or a pregnancy lasts too long before labor begins. There is serious disagreement over the use of induction for non-medical reasons. There is also debate on the safety of the procedure and the potential for negative outcomes for mothers and their babies.

What was once considered a last resort to save the health or lives of women and infants has, in the view of many critics, become a first-line response when the gestational clock passes 37 weeks.

Many countries prohibit elective inductions before 40 or 41 weeks. As Rachel Reed noted in the previously cited Daily Muck article, doctors in those countries have skirted that law by redefining and expanding the list of “medical reasons.”

It boils down to a question of “care” versus “convenience.” Doctors have a legal and ethical duty to provide comprehensive information on the reasons, risks and rewards of scheduled delivery.

Women experiencing one of the most emotionally charged events in their lives must demand that information before they agree to what even many of its supporters acknowledge is a risky procedure.

Subscribe to the Daily Muck to receive more in-depth articles and features on important issues facing today’s society.