$38.8 million birth injury verdict puts labor and delivery decision-making under the microscope
Industry Buzz
One of the issues when you have a child who's injured at birth is you don't know the full extent of the damage until they get a little bit older.
—Thomas Greer, personal injury lawyer, via FOX13
A Tennessee jury has awarded $38.8 million to a Memphis family in a birth injury medical malpractice case, a verdict that is drawing attention not only because of its size, but because it centers on a scenario every obstetric team hopes to avoid: A healthy pregnancy that allegedly deteriorated into a catastrophic delivery after missed opportunities to intervene.[][]
While the legal proceedings focused on whether the standard of care was breached, the case also serves as a reminder to physicians that documentation, communication, and timely escalation during labor remain some of the most scrutinized aspects of obstetric practice.
What happened?
The case began with what was expected to be a routine delivery for a first-time mother. According to testimony presented at trial, the mother arrived at the hospital in early labor with an elevated white blood cell count—a finding that can raise concern for infection in the obstetric setting.[]
As labor progressed, additional warning signs reportedly emerged, including meconium-stained amniotic fluid while she was only about four centimeters dilated, abnormalities on fetal heart rate monitoring, and an approximately 8-minute fetal heart rate deceleration after rupture of membranes.
The plaintiffs argued these findings pointed to evolving intra-amniotic infection and fetal compromise that warranted prompt reassessment and delivery. Instead, the lawsuit alleged, labor continued for roughly 14 more hours before physicians proceeded with a cesarean delivery.
The plaintiffs contended that this delay fell below the standard of care because the accumulating maternal and fetal findings should have prompted an earlier delivery. The defense disputed those allegations, maintaining that the care provided and the timing of delivery were within accepted clinical judgment and challenging whether an earlier delivery would have changed the outcome.
The infant was born critically ill. Court records presented during trial indicated the newborn developed sepsis and persistent pulmonary hypertension severe enough to require extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The child also suffered an intracranial hemorrhage and ultimately required ligation of a carotid artery. At approximately 10 months of age, the child experienced a stroke.
By the time of trial, nearly 9 years later, the child was living with permanent cognitive impairment and intellectual disability requiring lifelong medical care and support.
“Over 90% of the trials that go forward against doctors and hospitals are lost. So, this was an uphill battle from the very beginning. One of the issues when you have a child who's injured at birth is you don’t know the full extent of the damage until they get a little bit older,” Thomas Greer, a personal injury lawyer, told FOX13. []
The jury awarded $38.8 million to compensate for future medical expenses, loss of earning capacity, and noneconomic damages related to those permanent injuries. []
What doctors can learn
The specifics of one malpractice case should never be generalized to every obstetric emergency. Still, the themes are familiar to physicians across specialties.
Clinical timelines matter. When fetal status changes, documentation should clearly reflect what was observed, what differential diagnoses were considered, what interventions were initiated, and why particular management decisions were made.
Escalation should be explicit, not assumed. Whether involving a difficult fetal heart tracing, prolonged labor, or concern for fetal compromise, documentation should identify when senior physicians were notified, when consultations occurred, and how the team reached management decisions.
Fetal monitoring deserves contemporaneous interpretation. Electronic fetal monitoring is frequently reanalyzed years after delivery by opposing experts. Recording your interpretation of evolving tracings—and documenting reassessments when the clinical picture changes—can be just as important as saving the tracing itself.
Communication with families has long-term implications. Clear, compassionate communication during and after obstetric emergencies may not change clinical outcomes, but it can improve trust and reduce misunderstandings that later become part of legal proceedings.
Documentation should tell the clinical story. A chart should allow another physician to understand why decisions were made based on the information available at the time—not in hindsight. Missing rationale can be difficult to reconstruct years later.
The broader takeaway
Large malpractice verdicts inevitably capture headlines, but they rarely hinge on a single mistake. More often, they reflect a jury’s interpretation of an entire sequence of events, including clinical decision-making, communication among team members, documentation, and expert testimony.
For physicians, the lesson isn’t to practice defensive medicine. It’s to recognize that high-acuity situations require disciplined clinical reasoning, timely escalation, and documentation that accurately captures both the patient’s evolving condition and the team’s response.
Birth injury litigation remains among the most medically and legally complex areas of malpractice because it asks juries to reconstruct rapidly evolving clinical decisions with the benefit—and burden—of hindsight.
Cases like this are a reminder that while adverse outcomes are not always preventable, a well-documented, evidence-based decision-making process remains one of a clinician’s strongest safeguards.
Read Next: $100M for botched circumcision—has this doctor’s 33-year reign of terror finally come to an end?