49 LAWYER MONTHLY EXPERT WITNESS AWARDS 2025 provide expert reports for clinical negligence claims and accidents involving O&G injuries. The specific areas include: • Advanced Minimal Access Surgery: Cases related to laparoscopic (keyhole) hysterectomy, hysteroscopic surgery (like resection of fibroids), and management of conditions like endometriosis. • Antenatal Care: Issues concerning the management of pregnancy, including medical disorders during pregnancy. • Labour and Childbirth: Management of labour, caesarean sections, instrumental deliveries (ventouse and forceps), childbirth injuries (like perineal tears), and post-partum problems. • Acute/Emergency Gynaecology & Early Pregnancy: Cases involving conditions like ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, ovarian cysts, and pelvic abscesses. • General & Benign Gynaecology: Matters related to vaginal and abdominal surgery (hysterectomy, pelvic floor repair), heavy menstrual bleeding, fibroids, and pelvic pain. My case portfolio demonstrates experience across the spectrum, including instructions for claimants, defendants, and on a joint basis, preparing approximately 50 reports annually. I have experience providing oral evidence in Civil, Family, and Coroner’s Courts In your experience, what are some of the most common misconceptions legal professionals or clients have about obstetrics-related claims? Common areas of misunderstanding in obstetrics medico-legal cases often include: • Causation Complexity: Underestimating the complex interplay of factors in adverse outcomes. An undesirable result doesn’t automatically equate to substandard care; distinguishing requires careful analysis of the specific clinical context and timeline available at the time. • Hindsight Bias: Viewing decisions made during labour or pregnancy through the lens of the known outcome, rather than assessing care based on the information reasonably available to clinicians at the time. “Normal” vs. “Optimal” Outcomes: Confusing an acceptable standard of care with a perfect outcome. Childbirth has inherent risks, and the legal test is whether care met the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner, not whether a different course might hypothetically have yielded a better result.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz