A 25-year-old woman who was left severely brain damaged after an asthma attack, has been unsuccessful in her claim in negligence against the ambulance service, with the Supreme Court of Queensland finding no breach of duty of care.
Background
On 21 July 2002, 25-year-old Jennifer Masson, who was a chronic asthmatic, drove to the home of her friend Jonathon Turner in Brinsmead, Cairns. On walking into the house, she was wheezing badly and announced she was returning to her car, apparently to look for her Ventolin puffer. When she returned to the house she asked Mr Turner to take her to the hospital. As they walked outside she collapsed on the front lawn. Another friend who was present telephoned for an ambulance and Mr Turner performed mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
Ambulance officers arrived at 10:58 pm, six minutes after the call. Ms Masson was noted to be in respiratory arrest and hypoxic. The ambulance officer, Mr Peters applied an intravenous cannula and one minute after arrival he commenced administering intravenous salbutamol. Ms Masson was loaded in to the ambulance at 11:14 pm to be transported to hospital. However during the ambulance ride, cardiac arrest was imminent, so Mr Peters administered 300 micrograms of adrenaline.
Ms Masson suffered severe hypoxic brain damage as a result of oxygen deprivation. It was not in dispute that this was caused as a result of events prior to her arrival at hospital. Ms Masson was catastrophically brain damaged and remained in around-the-clock care up until her death in 2016.
Court proceedings
Ms Masson’s estate commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of Queensland against the State of Queensland, in negligence and claimed damages. It argued that the deprivation of oxygen giving rise to the hypoxic brain injury occurred in the course of her treatment by the ambulance officers because adrenaline was not administered during the initial phase of her treatment at the scene.
The State denied liability. It argued that Ms Masson’s severe hypoxic brain damage had already irreversibly occurred prior to intervention by the ambulance officers.
Quantum was agreed at $3m prior to trial.
His Honour Henry J found that there would have existed a responsible body of opinion in the medical profession in support of the view that Ms Masson’s high heart rate and high blood pressure, in the context of her overall condition, provided a medically sound basis to prefer the administration of salbutamol to the administration of adrenaline at the time of initial treatment. [93] Further, Henry J found that the treatment which was administered did not fall below the standard of care to be observed by ambulance officers and was not contrary to the QAS asthma guideline. [155]
Accordingly, no breach of the duty of care had been established and on that basis, Henry J dismissed Ms Masson’s claim: Masson v State of Queensland.
For more information on the above contact Joe Bonura on (02) 4626 5077 or jbonura@marsdens.net.au.
This article first appeared in the CCH Australian Tort, Personal Injury, Health and Medical Law Tracker and is reproduced in full with permission from CCH, a division of Wolters Kluwer Australia: www.wolterskluwer.cch.com.au
The contents of this publication are for reference purposes only. This publication does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Specific legal advice should always be sought separately before taking any action based on this publication
