Maryland Lawsuits AgainstHarvey Kasner, M.D.
Towson, MD 21204
This website does not represent the outcome of these lawsuits against Harvey Kasner, M.D., nor does it judge the veracity of the accusations therein. In Maryland, however, all medical malpractice lawsuits require a certificate from an actively practicing doctor vouching for the merit of the lawsuit.
Harvey Kasner, M.D. is a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist affiliated with Greater Baltimore Medical Center (GBMC). Dr. Kasner has been a practicing physician for over 17 years and is dedicated to improving healthcare management. He is a former chairman of GBMC’s Obstetrics Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement Committee and currently teaches in the obstetrics and gynecology department of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Although this page is focused solely on Dr. Kasner, you can find information about medical malpractice lawsuits filed against GBMC here.
Based on publicly available records and data, Dr. Kasner has been named as a co-defendant in five Maryland medical malpractice cases. While two of the five Maryland circuit court complaints are available in a PDF below, here is an excerpt of the allegations:
The first available complaint against Dr. Kasner lists the following allegations:
- Failing to properly manage a medical emergency. Per the complaint, the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant hospital at 39 weeks gestation after experiencing contractions. She was then reportedly given an intravenous dose of Pitocin, a drug used to initiate active labor. After nearly eight hours of uneventful labor, fetal monitoring purportedly indicated a sudden and dramatic drop in heart rate and oxygen supply. As cited in the complaint, appropriate standards of care dictated an immediate delivery to minimize the risk of brain damage. Instead, two co-defendant nurses assigned to care for the plaintiff allegedly made no effort to complete a delivery and did not request assistance from attending physicians until 12 minutes after the fetal heart rate began to fall.
- Failing to prevent patient harm. According to the complaint, the defendant doctor arrived shortly after assistance was requested by the co-defendant nurses. He purportedly delivered the infant roughly five minutes later using a vacuum extraction. The infant reportedly required immediate intubation, extensive neonatal intensive care, and residential treatment at a pediatric hospital. She was eventually diagnosed with catastrophic and permanent brain damage resulting from an extended period of oxygen deprivation during birth. The complaint contends that this injury was directly caused by the defendants’ failure to provide appropriate standards of care. As further maintained in the complaint, an immediate delivery should have been implemented at the first sign of fetal cardiac distress. Had the defendants proceeded with this course of action, the complaint asserts, the plaintiff’s infant would likely have been born healthy.
The second available complaint against Dr. Kasner lists the following allegations:
- Failing to administer a necessary cesarean section. As asserted in the complaint, the plaintiff developed gestational diabetes during her pregnancy. Gestational diabetes is a blood sugar disorder that can result in high birth weight. At roughly 36 weeks of pregnancy, the plaintiff underwent an ultrasound that revealed her fetus was in the 90th percentile for gestational weight. Shortly after, she was advised by her treating doctor of the potential necessity of a cesarean section delivery due to the large size of the fetus. One week later, the plaintiff’s water broke and she was admitted to the labor and delivery unit of the defendant hospital. Despite the documented risks of a vaginal birth due to the plaintiff’s gestational diabetes and high fetal weight, the defendant doctor proceeded to deliver the baby vaginally.
- Failing to properly perform a vaginal delivery. The complaint contends that during the vaginal delivery, the baby encountered a complication known as shoulder dystocia. This occurs when the baby’s shoulder becomes trapped behind the mother’s pubic bone as it travels down the birth canal. As alleged in the complaint, the defendant doctor used excessive traction to free the baby and complete the delivery. As a result, the baby reportedly sustained a left arm injury called brachial plexus that is expected to permanently and severely limit the use of her arm.
- Failing to prevent patient harm. Per the complaint, the birth defects suffered by the plaintiff’s child were directly caused by the defendant doctor’s negligence in providing the safest possible treatment plan. As further maintained in the complaint, the plaintiff should have undergone a cesarean section delivery due to her history of gestational diabetes and the high fetal birth weight. The complaint also states that the defendant doctor should have refrained from using excessive force to resolve the shoulder dystocia that occurred during the vaginal delivery. Had the defendant adhered to these proper standards of medical care, the complaint asserts, the plaintiff’s infant would likely have been born healthy.
Last updated August 16, 2021