I attended part of a Coroner’s inquest today for the first time. It was in relation to a newborn baby who died in October 2006 from a streptococcal infection seven hours after her birth.
The mother, who went full term, had earlier tested negative to the bacteria at 39 weeks, which was why no antibiotics were given.
However, she had a very long labor and only delivered the baby 43 hours after her waters broke.
Neither the parents nor the Coroner are seeking to blame anyone for the infant’s death.
I heard the Coroner say that he wants to establish if consistent guidelines are needed for how doctors and midwives should handle particular situations.
The court heard there are different practices among midwives, doctors and hospitals for determining how long a mother should wait after her waters break before being induced, and how much time should pass before antibiotics are given.
I heard one midwife say that each patient is assessed according to her age, health and how many previous children she has had.
Even so, I’m surprised there isn’t a textbook approach that medical professionals follow as closely as possible.
The interesting thing about an inquest is how it’s less adversarial than other courts.
Cross-examination was polite and there was no attempt to embarrass or harass a witness.
There was some discussion about why the doctor had determined 8am as the time the mother would be induced if her labor hadn’t begun.
It went unsaid that this time was probably convenient to the medical staff.
The parents have shown good grace in only wanting to prevent future tragedies like the one they experienced.
×0
