A County Louth gynaecologist, Dr Michael Neary, and Our Lady Of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, yesterday appealed to the Supreme Court against a High Court award of €273,223 damages to a woman after a finding that Dr Neary had removed her womb in circumstances "practically unheard of".
The outcome of the appeal will be observed closely by lawyers acting for other women who are alleging that Dr Neary performed unnecessary Caesarean hysterectomy operations on them.
Mr Charles Meenan SC, for the appellants, advanced a number of grounds of appeal, including that the High Court was wrong not to find the action was statute barred. The appeal, before a three judge court of Mr Justice Hardiman, presiding, Mr Justice Geoghegan and Mr Justice McCracken, concluded yesterday and judgment was reserved.
In the High Court last November, Mr Justice Johnson found Dr Neary was negligent in his treatment of Ms Alison Gough at the time of the birth of her first and only child in October 1992.
Had Dr Neary carried out certain procedures on Ms Gough, it would not have been necessary to remove her womb shortly after the birth of her first baby by Caesarian section, the judge found.
Awarding Ms Gough €273,223 damages and costs in her action against Dr Michael Neary and Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, Mr Justice Johnson said it was practically unheard of to perform a Caesarean hysterectomy on a woman in Ms Gough's then circumstances. Ms Gough (37), of Ardee, County Louth, was aged 27 at the time of the birth on October 27th, 1992. The judge said that, for a Caesarean hysterectomy to be performed on a young woman without having complicating conditions such as either cancer or placenta praevia was practically unheard of.
At the time, Ms Gough was prima gravida, expecting her first child. She claimed Dr Neary was negligent in carrying out the operation and in failing to take sufficient and proper steps to stop the haemorrhage from which she was suffering. Alternatively, she claimed Dr Neary embarked on the procedure without having given proper and sufficient time to "conservative" methods of stemming the blood.
The judge said that, some days after the birth, Ms Gough spoke to the nurses and said that if she was going to have another child, she would prefer to cut out the labour and have a section. They told her to ask her doctor. Dr Neary came to visit her in a public ward and she said that if she was going to have any more children, she would like to have them by section, to which he replied "No". She asked him what he meant.
Dr Neary said he had had to remove her womb and that she had had a hysterectomy. He said he "had saved her life", that she had lost so much blood he had never witnessed anything like it.
Mr Justice Johnson said there had been evidence from an obstetrician called on behalf of Ms Gough that between 1990 and 1998 there was not a single Caesarian hysterectomy of a priva gravida patient in the National Maternity Hospital.
