Woman awarded over $100 million in damages after surgery at Cornwall Regional Hospital left her paralysed

One of the highest Supreme Court awards for medical negligence, in the sum of more than $100 million with interest, has been awarded to a 49-year-old woman who is now paralysed after undergoing a spinal decompression surgery at the Cornwall Regional Hospital in St James in October 2015.

Justice Maxine Jackson last week ordered the defendants the Western Regional Health Authority, operator of the hospital, and the Attorney General of Jamaica to compensate the claimant, Nicole Ann Fullerton Clarke.

For general damages the claimant was awarded $70 million for pain and suffering, $8.6 million for future home care, $5.2 million for future loss of income, $1.8 million for future medication, $2.9 million for daily living (diapers and gloves), $720,000 for future doctors' visits and physiotherapy, $360,000 for future transportation and US$23,353 for motorised wheelchair.

She was awarded special damages of $6.1 million for loss of income, $1.9 million for extra help (home care), $$627,294 for medical expenses and $120,000 for transportation.

The claimant, who was represented by attorney-at-law Catherine Minto who was previously instructed by Nunes, Scholefield, DeLeon & Co, had sued the health authority and the government.

The claimant who is now bedridden had stated that the hospital owed a duty of care to her in relation to the treatment provided.

In 2015 the claimant, who resides in the parish of Trelawny, was experiencing tingling in her fingers with numbness and swelling to her right leg and was referred to the neurosurgery clinic for treatment.

She was diagnosed with having cervical myelopathy at the C3-5 levels of the spine. This is a condition where the space level around the spinal column narrows, compressing a section of nerve tissue, and was caused by cervical disc herniations at C3-4, C4-5 and C5-6 levels.

According to the claimant, a recommendation for surgery was made after she had only been examined twice by the neurosurgery clinic at the defendant hospital. She claimed that the surgery recommended was not the standard of care for treating her condition as “it causes instability of the spinal column, progression of cervical disc herniation and kyphotic deformity of the cervical portion of the spinal column.

No alternative or non-surgical treatment was recommended or explored by the hospital before advising her to undergo surgery. She said she was not advised on all the risks associated with the surgery and was not advised to seek a second expert opinion.

The surgery was performed on October 18, 2015 and the claimant said she was now left with more severe personal injuries and permanent physical disability. She said before the surgery she was still able to walk and was able to work and carry on her daily activities.

Some of the particulars of the  29 injuries that the claimant is now suffering from are paraplegia; severe quadriparesis; cramps affecting the muscles and extremities; inability to sit up or bathe without assistance; worsening or progression of disc herniation; tongue jerk and difficulty speaking at times; right foot in fixed, deformed and immobile position; depression and psychological issues caused by the worsening of her physical condition.

She also now has partial permanent disability in 72 per cent of the whole person as well as increased risk of death and/or shortened life expectancy.

The defendants who were represented by attorney-at-law Faith Hall, instructed by the Director of State Proceedings did not call any witnesses at the hearing.

The defendants did not accept liability and asserted that neither the hospital nor its servants were negligent in the performance of the surgical procedure. They stated in their defence that the claimant was evaluated by a senior neurosurgeon with four decades of experience and she was offered the only possibility of improvement given the clinical and radiological findings.

The hospital reiterated that all the risks associated with the procedure were adequately explained to the claimant and she signed an informed consent document accepting that she fully understood the procedure and its risks.

The defendants stated that “the claimant presented with a progressive neurological disorder.The MRI imaging demonstrated compression of the cervical cord by extensive ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in front of the spinal cord (OPLL), this is a well known and potentially correctable cause of myelopathy.”

According to the defendants “the operation achieved the objective of decompressing the spinal cord and she was no worse following the surgery. However, after several weeks despite aggressive care it became apparent that the OPLL was a 'red herring' and her progressive neurological decline was on the basis of an as yet defined degenerative disorder, possible autoimmune or demyelinating in origin.”

-Barbara Gayle

Follow The Gleaner on X and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.