Stock photo of pregnant woman.
A man in Australia tried to sue a Melbourne hospital for A$1 billion for psychological damage.
He alleged that he was “encouraged” to watch his wife have a cesarian section.
He said seeing his wife’s blood and organs led to him developing a “psychotic illness.”
A man in Australia accused a hospital in Melbourne of causing him to develop a “psychotic illness” after he watched his wife undergo a cesarean section, local news outlet 7News reported.
Anil Koppula tried to sue the Royal Women’s Hospital for letting him watch his wife give birth via C-section in 2018.
He sued for A$1 billion, which is about $643 million, 7NEWS reported.
The cesarean was a success, but the man claims the hospital failed in its duty of care to him by letting him watch the procedure, the 7News report says.
He said the hospital “encouraged” or “permitted” him to watch the operation and that seeing his wife’s organs and blood caused the mental illness he claimed to have, it adds.
A cesarean section is a common operation in which an surgeon delivers a baby “through a cut made in your tummy and womb,” according to the National Health Service.
The surgical procedure is often performed when another course is dangerous or difficult and poses a risk to the mother or baby.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 32.1% of all baby deliveries in the US in 2021 were by cesarean section.
Koppula filed the lawsuit several years after the operation, claiming he is owed damages because of the life-changing psychological injury he allegedly obtained.
In his legal claim, he said the “psychotic illness” led to a “breakdown of his marriage,” per 7News.
Koppula chose to represent himself in court, where Justice James Gorton dismissed the suit and deemed the claim an “abuse of process,” according to Global News.
The trial proceedings included a medical examination of Koppula. The panel concluded that the alleged psychological effect on Koppula was insufficient.
It found that “the degree of psychiatric impairment resulting from the injury to the claimant alleged in the claim does not satisfy the threshold level,” 7News reported.