Latest news with #IanCarter
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Health
- Irish Times
Limerick hospital apologises in High Court for baby's death at 16 weeks old
University Maternity Hospital Limerick has apologised after acknowledging it breached its duty of care to a baby boy who died following a delayed diagnosis. The apology came as the infant's mother settled her High Court action against the HSE over his death at 16 weeks old. 'We are deeply sorry for your loss and for the profound sorrow of being denied the opportunity to watch your beloved son grow and thrive,' the hospital said in a letter read to the court. Dr John O'Mahony SC, for the family, said the baby was doing well when he was born at Limerick hospital in January 2021. READ MORE However, when he was two weeks old his condition deteriorated and tests showed he had an E. coli meningitis infection. He was given antibiotics, the court heard. Dr O'Mahony said the baby's condition later deteriorated suddenly and he had a fever. He further deteriorated, requiring intubation and ventilation, the court heard. An MRI scan showed global ischaemia, which involves a reduced blood flow to the brain. The baby received palliative care, but died when he was 16 weeks old. In the letter, Ian Carter, the chief executive of HSE Midwest Acute Services Limerick, offered 'sincere and heartfelt apologies' to the mother and wider family 'for this failure'. The letter, written on behalf of the hospital and its staff, acknowledged a 'breach in our duty of care to your baby which resulted in a delayed diagnosis with devastating consequences'. In the family's case it was claimed there was a failure to take proper action in response to the baby's condition. The family also claimed there was a failure to recognise the baby's obvious signs of sepsis when he was moved to intensive care on February 19th, 2021, and a failure to ensure appropriate antibiotics were administered urgently. The claims were denied. The mother and the child cannot be identified by order of the court. Noting the settlement and the division of the statutory mental distress payment, Mr Justice Paul Coffey extended his sympathy to the baby's mother and extended family.
BreakingNews.ie
11 hours ago
- Health
- BreakingNews.ie
University Maternity Hospital Limerick apologises to mother of baby who died
University Maternity Hospital Limerick has apologised to the mother of a little boy who died, and it acknowledged a breach in the hospital's duty of care to the baby, which resulted in a delayed diagnosis 'with devastating consequences.' 'We are deeply sorry for your loss and for the profound sorrow of being denied the opportunity to watch your beloved son grow and thrive,' the hospital said in a letter read out in the High Court. Advertisement The mother of the baby, who was 16-weeks-old when he died, has settled a High Court action against the HSE over his death. The mother or child cannot be identified by order of the court. The family's counsel Dr John O'Mahony SC with Doireann O Mahony BL instructed by solicitor Brigid O'Donnell told the High Court it was a sad and tragic case. Counsel said when the little boy was born at the Limerick Hospital in January 2021, he was doing well until two weeks later his condition deteriorated and tests including lumbar punctures showed he had an E Coli meningitis infection and he was started on antibiotics. Advertisement Counsel said the baby's condition later suddenly deteriorated and he had a fever. He deteriorated further and needed to be intubated and ventilated. An MRI scan showed global ischaemia which is when blood flow to the brain is reduced. The baby later received palliative care and he died when he was 16 weeks old. In the letter from the chief executive of HSE Midwest Acute Services, Ian Carter, University Maternity Hospital Limerick offered 'sincere and heartfelt apologies" to the mother and wider family 'for this failure.' It said: 'On behalf of the management and staff at University Maternity Hospital, Limerick, I wish to acknowledge the breach in our duty of care to your baby which resulted in a delayed diagnosis with devastating consequences for you and your extended family. Advertisement "Please know that our thoughts are with you, and we extend our deepest sympathy to you and your family at this incredibly difficult time.' In the proceedings it was claimed there was an alleged failure to take any or any proper action which such was warranted by the baby's condition and an alleged delay had been caused in enabling the baby to receive proper urgent care and treatment for his condition. Ireland Assets linked to alleged Kinahan associate deemed... Read More It was further claimed there was an alleged failure to recognise the baby's obvious signs of sepsis when he was moved into intensive care on February 19th, 2021, and to ensure the administration of the appropriate antibiotics urgently or in a timely fashion. There was it was claimed an alleged delay in the administration of broad spectrum antibiotics when it ought to have bene known that such a delay would expose the baby to a serious risk of injury or death. The claims had been denied. Noting the settlement and the division of the statutory mental distress solatium payment, Mr Justice Paul Coffey extended his deepest sympathy to the baby's mother and extended family.
NZ Herald
05-05-2025
- NZ Herald
Wellington professional escapes conviction for filming colleagues on the toilet
In a court decision made in March but only recently released to the Herald, Judge Ian Carter said the offending happened in a Wellington workplace, the name of which is suppressed. 'Sometime between the start of his employment with the particular employer and his finishing in that employment on 22 April last year, he concealed a covert recording device in a workplace unisex toilet cubicle,' Judge Carter said in the decision. 'The camera was concealed on at least two separate occasions. The first date is unknown, and the second date was the day the device was found on 19 April last year.' The defendant adjusted the device and tested the camera angle to ensure it captured the immediate area around the toilet seat. The device activated when it detected motion or sound and sent footage directly to the defendant's phone. Investigators were able to retrieve footage of seven of the man's adult colleagues using the toilet. The victims range in age from mid-20s to early 50s, and include six men and one woman. Judge Carter said he had read the victim impact statements. 'All expressed a range of emotions including embarrassment, anger, shock, betrayal of trust and considerable impact. They felt upset and unsettled and much less trusting than they were before, including in particular when using any toilet or bathroom which is accessible by others, whether in a public space or workplace situation.' Many of the victims said they now feel paranoid and will check and scan around bathrooms before using them. 'There was undoubtedly a significant and serious impact on them all.' While not diminishing this impact, Judge Carter said he needed to assess the gravity of the offending and whether the consequences of a conviction might be out of proportion. He said the man had taken steps since being charged to engage with a counsellor and psychologist, both of whom provided reports to the court. 'Both of those professionals express the opinion that the offending was not sexually motivated. That may at first glance seem surprising as the nature of the offending would suggest to most people that that is the likely motivation,' he said. The psychologist's report recorded the defendant's explanation was that he felt he was being bullied by a manager. He was suffering from stress and anxiety, which stemmed from a background of social isolation, and also had depression. The psychologist also diagnosed him with ADHD. The defendant had explained due to his mental health at the time, he planted the device as a way to try to get dismissed from his job. 'That, at first glance, seems an implausible explanation,' the judge said. But based on the context in the psychologist's report, Judge Carter said he was persuaded that it was an accurate and honest explanation. '[The defendant] accepts that it was naïve and foolish to have used that particular method to try and end his employment relationship but in context it does seem likely.' Judge Carter said the psychologist was also trained in dealing with sexual offenders. Both he and the counsellor expressed a belief there was a low risk of the man reoffending. The judge also noted there was no evidence the footage was shared with anyone else. Other factors the judge considered included that he had no previous convictions, had prepared letters of apology to each victim, and that he voluntarily did 233 hours of community work. He said the primary consequence of a conviction was that the man would lose his career, for which he has almost completed his qualifications. 'I do not need any convincing about that. I think that is inevitable,' he said. 'Here I think the consequences, effectively loss of [the defendant's] career and employment prospects in his chosen field, would be disproportionate to the low to moderate gravity of the offending which I have assessed.' He said the interests of the defendant outweighed the public interest in him being convicted. The man had indicated he had been unemployed for some time, but that he had saved enough money to make emotional harm reparations of $100 per victim. The judge felt this was not enough, and ordered the man pay $350 to each victim. Judge Carter also granted permanent name suppression, saying he had evidence of the man's 'fragile mental health' and noted the discharge without conviction would be undermined if he was to be named publicly. Police opposed the discharge and name suppression applications.
