Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust

3. Mrs D complains whilst she was giving birth on 11 March 2024, the obstetric registrar continued in her attempts and delivered Mrs D’s baby, despite struggling to use the forceps and having to call for senior assistance. Mrs D complains the consultant obstetrician did not take over and use the forceps safely. She complains the same obstetric registrar failed to properly stitch her episiotomy or check for placental remains. Mrs D complains after her daughter was born, she was left unattended in a neonatal cot and her facial wound was not cleaned or dressed until nine hours after her birth.

4. Mrs D’s daughter sustained a deep laceration above her eyebrow caused by the forceps, requiring 15 stitches which has left a permanent scar. Mrs D says her episiotomy failed, she was left unable to walk, in pain, with daily bleeding due to placental remains for eight months until she could have surgery. She says this delayed her return to work and explains that even now she experiences pain and attends hospital monthly to check on her episiotomy scarring. Mrs D says both she and her daughter were caused avoidable distress being apart immediately after the birth, and due to delays in cleaning and dressing the wound, her daughter developed an infection and needed antibiotics which can be harmful at such a young age.

5. Mrs D says the trauma she experienced means she will likely not have more children. She says her mental health suffered causing severe anxiety and she was unable to look at her daughter for almost seven months, with the scar now a constant reminder of what happened.

6. To resolve her complaint Mrs D seeks a financial payment in recognition of the impact from these failings.

9. The law says we cannot investigate a complaint where a person has the option to take legal action, unless we consider it is not reasonable for them to do so. We do not base our decision on how successful legal action would be. Rather, we consider whether legal action is a reasonable option for someone to pursue.

10. We discussed this with Mrs D to understand her circumstances and the outcomes she wants. Mrs D explained the sole outcome she seeks is financial compensation. This is something that can be pursued through legal action, specifically through a clinical negligence claim.

11. We are generally not able to provide the same levels of financial remedy that a court can. Mrs D has come to us seeking a considerable amount. Whilst we can make some recommendations for financial remedy, we consider the courts best placed to consider a more significant financial outcome for Mrs D.

12. Mrs D told us she has not had success when contacting solicitors who work under a conditional fee arrangement, commonly known as a ‘no-win-no-fee’ basis. However Mrs D told us she was willing to pursue a ‘paid-for’ solicitor to achieve the compensation she seeks. Mrs D also told us she had secured a meeting with a solicitor’s firm to discuss her complaint. This indicates she has access to legal representation to explore the possibility of legal action.

13. We have considered the relevant factors and the law. Mrs D is still in time to pursue legal action. The legal route appears better suited to achieve the outcome she seeks. We do not see any barriers to prevent her from pursuing this option currently, and in line with our law, we think it is reasonable that she does so. We have therefore decided not to consider the complaint further.

14. We recognise how important this complaint is to Mrs D and we thank her for bringing it to us for our consideration.

1. We were very sorry to have learned about what happened, to have led Mrs D to bring her complaint to us. We consider Mrs D could take legal action on the matters she has raised. On this basis we have decided not to consider the complaint further.

2. We understand how important this matter is to Mrs D. We recognise what happened continues to cause her considerable distress. We explain the reasons for our decision below.