Obstetrician faces Medical Council hearing on childbirth case

Obstetrician and gynaecologist Dr. Liang Shuk-tak, the sister of former senior broadcaster Selina Chow, is facing a Medical Council hearing over allegations of professional misconduct relating to the treatment of a patient during childbirth in 2017.

The embattled doctor who has delivered babies for celebrities including Brigitte Lin and Guo Jingjing is accused of failing to properly document the position of the foetal head, the shape or size of the mother's pelvis and the use of oxytocin to induce labour.

She is also accused of verbally berating a patient.

The hearing took place before the Medical Council on Wednesday.

The incident occurred in mid-February 2017.

Giving evidence, the complainant said she arrived at the delivery ward of Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital in the morning. A nurse told her that Dr. Liang had requested that she receive an injection to induce labour. The complainant said she refused.

She alleged that Dr. Liang later called her and said she had an appointment in the afternoon, asking her to either undergo labour induction or receive an epidural. Otherwise, she would have to be delivered by the hospital's on-call doctor.

The complainant said when Dr. Liang arrived at the hospital, she loudly berated her.

She also alleged that, without carrying out an examination, Dr. Liang instructed nurses to manually rupture her membranes, without explaining the reasons or potential consequences.

The complainant said by the end of August the following year, she felt she had been humiliated during childbirth, leaving her deeply affected and traumatised. She said she suffered recurring nightmares as a result.

She asked Dr. Liang for an apology and compensation. Dr. Liang did apologise, but the complainant described the apology as perfunctory.

It was not until 2023 that she lodged a complaint with the Medical Council.

During cross-examination by the defence, the complainant acknowledged that this was the second time she had asked Dr. Liang to deliver her baby. She said she had considered Dr. Liang's service satisfactory when she gave birth to her first child.

The defence argued that Dr. Liang had explained the reasons for administering the labour-inducing injection. It also said Dr. Liang had never told the complainant that she had to "leave at 4:30." The complainant denied that she had misremembered the conversation.

The prosecution's expert witness: a former head of obstetrics and gynaecology at four hospitals, told the hearing that prescribing oxytocin to induce labour was not standard practice in the circumstances. He said the medical records did not explain why the drug had been administered and considered the approach inappropriate.

The defence countered that doctors in public hospitals generally need to maintain detailed clinical records because of the need to hand over cases between shifts. But Dr. Liang worked at a private hospital, the defence argued, where there was no need for another doctor to follow up on the case. It therefore argued that she was not required to document every detail behind her clinical decisions and that the failure to do so did not amount to professional misconduct.