An eight-year-old girl who sued over the circumstances of her birth at Cork University Maternity Hospital has settled her High Court action with an interim payment of over €1 million.
Mr Justice Tony O’Connor approved the interim payment, to cover the next five years, and praised the resilience of the young girl.
She cannot be named by order of the court.
Her counsel, Oonah McCrann SC, instructed by Cantillons solicitors, told the court a personal and private letter of apology has been sent by the hospital to the young girl.
Michael Harding: I went to the cinema to see Small Things Like These. By the time I emerged I had concluded the film was crap
Look inside: 1950s bungalow transformed into modern five-bed home in Greystones for €1.15m
‘I’m in my early 30s and recently married - but I cannot imagine spending the rest of my life with her’
Karlin Lillington: Big Tech may not get everything it wants from Trump
Liability was admitted in the case in 2019 but there were still issues in relation to causation, she said.
Counsel said it was their case that signs of foetal distress went unrecognised as the heartrate monitor hospital staff were looking at was the maternal one rather that the one that monitors the baby’s heartbeat.
Counsel said the baby girl had a brain injury but, due to the “heroic efforts by the parents and her own resilience”, the young girl has made a “miraculous recovery” and is able to take part in all activities. She has also undergone intensive therapies to help her.
The €1,050,000 settlement relates to past and future special damages and is for the next five years. Counsel told the court it is not clear how the girl is going to progress but other matters will be assessed in 2028.
Approving the settlement, Mr Justice O’Connor said he had real admiration for the girl and the devotion of her parents.
The girl had through her mother sued the Health Service Executive (HSE). It was claimed that In the hospital delivery suite, the heartbeat monitoring that had been disconnected during the transfer was recommenced.
It is claimed that from the recommencement of the monitoring, the maternal heart rate was being recorded by both the maternal pulse probe and the other monitor, with the result being that the foetal heart rate was not being recorded.
It was further claimed that the fact that the foetal heart rate was not being recorded was not recognised and it was assumed that the maternal heart rate was that of the baby.
The mother was later transferred to theatre and the baby was born by emergency caesarean section and required ventilation and intubation at birth.