Hospital Liable for Newborn's Death After Excessive Feeding, Court Rules
Translated from Korean, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- A newborn infant died three days after birth at a maternity clinic, and a court ruled the hospital liable for medical malpractice.
- The court ordered the hospital to pay 540 million won (approximately $390,000) in damages to the parents.
- The ruling cited excessive feeding and delayed emergency response as contributing factors to the infant's death.
A Seoul court has found a maternity clinic liable for medical malpractice in the death of a newborn infant, ordering the hospital to pay over 540 million won (approximately $390,000) in damages to the parents. The infant, born on January 16, 2024, died just three days later at the clinic.
The court determined that the medical staff administered 270ml of milk over approximately eight hours, in six feedings, to the infant between the evening of January 18 and the early morning of January 19. The infant was later found unresponsive with cyanosis and apnea. Despite resuscitation efforts and a swift transfer to another hospital, the baby died around 7 a.m.
They administered continuous feedings at short intervals, potentially for their own convenience, violating their duty of care as medical professionals.
A National Forensic Service autopsy suggested the cause of death could be suffocation due to aspiration of vomit. The court found the clinic negligent, stating they did not adhere to recommended feeding practices and administered continuous feedings at short intervals, potentially for their own convenience. Furthermore, the court criticized the delayed emergency response and the interruption of CPR while attempting intubation.
The hospital had argued against the ruling, claiming they did not overfeed the infant and that the death was due to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, not aspiration. However, the court rejected these claims and the hospital has since appealed the decision.
The court found that the medical staff did not promptly report to 119 and continued to attempt endotracheal intubation using an aspirator, which likely interrupted the continuous cardiopulmonary resuscitation that should have been performed.
Originally published by Dong-A Ilbo in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.