SALEM, Ore. (Legal Newsline) – A woman whose newborn suffocated under her breast at Portland Adventist Medical Center can proceed with a lawsuit for negligent infliction of emotional distress.
The Oregon Court of Appeals on Feb. 3 reinstated that claim in the case brought by Monica Thompson, whose four-day-old son Jacob died in the hospital’s maternity ward in August 2012. The court found there is a question about whether Monica had a disabling mental condition that justifies waiting five years to sue Portland Adventist.
Staff there gave Monica medication to help her sleep the night before she was to take Jacob home. She was also on narcotic painkillers.
At 3 a.m., a nurse brought her Jacob in order to breastfeed and left them alone. An hour later, Monica awoke to find Jacob unresponsive under her breast.
Doctors restarted his heart but concluded he had suffered severe, permanent brain damage and took him off life support.
“Following Jacob’s death, Monica returned to her clerical job in the funeral industry. All the while, however, she experienced intense feelings of grief and guilt, believing herself to have been responsible for Jacob’s death,” Judge Jacqueline Kamins wrote.
“In particular, Monica felt that she was responsible because she had signed a policy form at the hospital specifically promising that she would not sleep in the same bed as her baby.
“To help her process these feelings, Monica started seeing a therapist who treated her for grief, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and major depressive disorder.”
The court affirmed that waiting five years to sue tolled the statute of limitations on her negligence claims but says her reaction to Jacob’s death and evidence provided in therapy notes could justify the amount of time it took to file the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim.
“Here, in evaluating Monica’s therapy notes, the jury would be required to assess the impact that Monica’s various mental conditions—including PTSD, depression, and grief—had on her basic cognitive abilities,” Kamins wrote. “Because such a determination exceeds the knowledge of an ordinary lay juror, it would require the assistance of expert testimony.”