Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Woman who gave birth at B.C. Women's Hospital sues after ending up a paraplegic

A woman who was left a paraplegic after giving birth to her first child is suing B.C. Women’s Hospital and Health Centre and several doctors.
0123-justice_2.jpg
Scales of justice at the Law Courts in Vancouver.

A woman who was left a paraplegic after giving birth to her first child is suing B.C. Women’s Hospital and Health Centre and several doctors.

Samantha Baxter, described as a “healthy young woman” in her lawsuit, says that she was nearing term in her first pregnancy when she was admitted to the Vancouver hospital in July 2016 for induction of labour.

She says she was given an epidural anesthesia in anticipation of a conventional labour and delivery, but when she failed to progress with labour, a decision was made to perform a caesarean section.

A decision was then made by staff at the hospital to give her a spinal anesthesia to replace the epidural anesthesia ahead of the caesarean, according to the suit filed in B.C. Supreme Court.

Baxter says that she didn’t give informed consent and the spinal anesthesia was negligently prepared and administered by Dr. Aggrey Lubikire.

As a result of the procedure, she says she suffered a spinal-cord injury and is now a paraplegic, permanently paralyzed from the waist down, and confined to a wheelchair.

Her neurological defects include major sensation loss, muscle weakness, complete bowel and bladder dysfunction, and severe and chronic pain, she claims.

“Being confined to a wheelchair contributes to ongoing bone-density loss that makes her limbs much more susceptible to breaks,” says Baxter’s suit. “Her ability to parent and be involved in the day-to-day raising of her young daughter has also been severely limited. She has also suffered the loss of several of her recreational pleasures such as dancing.”

Baxter’s husband has taken extensive time off work and assists her on a daily and ongoing basis by taking her to appointments, administering medication and providing emotional and psychological support, says the suit.

The suit says that Dr. Lubikire, who is now a medical doctor living in Uganda, was at the time employed as an obstetric anesthesia fellow at the hospital but did not meet the standards and qualifications required of a candidate being considered for acceptance into the fellowship program.

It claims that Dr. James Brown, an anesthesiologist practising at B.C. Women’s, knew or ought to have known that Dr. Lubikire lacked the requisite qualifications, experience and skills to conduct an informed-consent discussion, but nonetheless sent Dr. Lubikire, unsupervised, to discuss the matter with Baxter and her husband.

The suit alleges that Dr. Lubikire’s negligence includes a failure to use proper sterile techniques, a failure to insert or extract the spinal needle properly and a failure to administer the correct medication.

It alleges that after the outcome of the procedure, the defendants concealed Dr. Lubikire’s lack of qualifications and skills, and the conclusions of their investigation.

The defendants did not disclose to her that she had suffered a “toxic” injury as a result of the anesthesia and did not tell her that based on the medical literature the chances of an “idiosyncratic” or “catastrophic” result of a spinal anesthesia procedure performed correctly was about 0.00001 per cent or less, says the suit.

Instead, the defendants told her and her family that she’d received the best medical care and practice, and that there was no possible explanation except that some patients have an unexplained catastrophic outcome, it says.

“In essence, the plaintiff was misled into believing that despite the provision of excellent care and practice, she was inexplicably ‘unlucky.’ ”

Baxter is seeking general, special, aggravated, punitive and exemplary damages.

“The physicians, nurses and all staff at B.C. Women’s Hospital are deeply committed to providing the best possible care for patients,” said an email statement from the hospital. “Legal counsel is reviewing the statement of claim and we cannot comment further as the matter is before the courts.”