The High Court has awarded Shs147 million in damages to a mother after ruling that Kibuli Muslim Hospital failed to provide appropriate medical care to her newborn son, whose condition worsened before he died days after birth.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Bonny Isaac Teko, the court found that the hospital breached its duty of care through delays in medical intervention, inadequate specialist attention and shortcomings in the management of an emergency blood transfusion.
According to court records, the mother, Kyofuna Jaridah, attended antenatal care at Kibuli Muslim Hospital from August 2018 until she delivered her baby by elective caesarean section on Oct. 5, 2018. The procedure was carried out under the supervision of Dr. Aturwanaho Dickens and the hospital’s obstetric team after what had been described as an uncomplicated pregnancy.
Following the delivery, both mother and child were reported to be in stable condition, and the newborn began breastfeeding without difficulty.
The situation changed the following night when the baby developed breathing problems. Kyofuna told the court she repeatedly sought urgent medical attention but no doctor attended to the child until the following morning.
Once admitted to the neonatal unit, doctors diagnosed the baby with anaemia and thrombocytopenia and made a provisional diagnosis of haemorrhagic disease of the newborn.
The court heard that the hospital could not obtain compatible donor blood from its blood bank or nearby health facilities. Acting on the advice of a consultant neonatologist, the medical team carried out an emergency direct blood transfusion using the mother’s blood in an effort to save the infant’s life.
Despite the intervention, the baby’s condition continued to deteriorate and he died on Oct. 9, 2018.
Kyofuna later filed a lawsuit, arguing that the hospital’s handling of her son’s treatment fell below acceptable medical standards. She alleged that the emergency transfusion was performed without informed consent, compatibility testing and the necessary equipment, contrary to Ministry of Health clinical guidelines. She also argued that medical staff delayed reviewing the baby’s condition despite clear signs that his health was deteriorating.
The hospital denied wrongdoing, maintaining that the infant was already critically ill before the transfusion and that the emergency procedure was undertaken only after efforts to secure compatible donor blood proved unsuccessful. It also argued that there was no post-mortem examination to establish the precise cause of death.
Justice Teko, however, concluded that the hospital’s failures materially contributed to the child’s death, even though the evidence did not prove that the blood transfusion alone directly caused it.
The judge held the hospital legally responsible for the actions of its medical staff, finding that delays in treatment and shortcomings in emergency care amounted to negligence.
The ruling underscores the legal duty of healthcare providers to respond promptly to medical emergencies and to follow accepted standards of care, particularly when treating vulnerable newborns. It also highlights the courts’ willingness to hold medical institutions accountable where lapses in patient care contribute to preventable loss of life.
