What happens when a patient says yes to a medical procedure, but feels she has no real choice? That question sits at the heart of Gawthrop v Bendigo Health [2026] VSC 157, a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria handed down by O’Meara J on 27 March 2026.
The mother in the case had a clearly documented birth plan declining vaginal examinations unless there was an urgent medical reason. When she presented to hospital in labour, the court heard, she was told she would not be admitted, given pain relief or have her usual midwife called until she had a vaginal examination. After about two hours, she agreed. The court found that her agreement was not free and voluntary consent, and held Bendigo Health liable in battery and negligence.
The court also found that the hospital’s own informed consent policy required consent to be given voluntarily, without pressure, and with a genuine choice offered, and that the hospital had breached the standard of care defined by that policy. The mother was awarded $275,000 in general damages, in addition to agreed special damages.
In this episode of the Birth Injury Lawyers Podcast, award-winning lawyer Anthony Porthouse unpacks the decision, exploring informed consent, patient rights and the legal responsibilities of healthcare providers during childbirth. He discusses how hospital practices can undermine genuine consent, why simply agreeing to a procedure doesn’t always amount to valid consent, and what the case may mean for maternity care and medical negligence claims in Australia. If you’ve ever questioned whether your choices were respected during childbirth, this is an important conversation about bodily autonomy, informed consent and your legal rights.
Not sure whether your choices were respected during your birth? The team at Birth Injury Lawyers can help. You can start with a free, confidential conversation with no obligation.
