Court clears hospital of negligence in boy’s botched circumcision

The High Court in Bungoma has dismissed a case in which a man had accused Bungoma County Referral Hospital of negligence after his son's circumcision. 

The father, codenamed MEW, had sued the hospital and a clinical officer seeking damages for what he described as a grievous botched operation that left his son in need of major reconstructive surgery.

The boy underwent circumcision at the hospital on November 28, 2022.

In the judgment delivered on 21 April 2026, Justice Rea Ougo found that the procedure was performed successfully by a duly licensed clinical officer. 

The court concluded that the gangrene the minor suffered after circumcision was caused by poor after-care and the father’s failure to seek prompt medical attention, not a surgical error.

The boy had been discharged in fair physical condition alongside his cousin, who had undergone the same procedure and healed without complications.

The father testified that at the time, there appeared to be no complications as the boys had not complained of pain and that after two days, the other boy was walking normally.

“It was his evidence that when they looked at the victim’s wound, it looked terrible, but they proceeded with the normal dressing. Since it was drying, they thought he was recovering,” court records show.

However, within days, the father noticed a change in the boy's walking style after he complained of a tight bandage.

“The plaintiff avers that the patient/minor's condition deteriorated when, during a home dressing, he observed that there was no healing and, instead, suspected skin decomposition."

The father told the court that his request for follow-up with at Bungoma hospital was declined, forcing him to take his son to Bungoma West Hospital on December 13, 2022. He was immediately admitted and discharged on December 26, 2022 after the surgery was successfully redone.

However, the respondents maintained that the surgery was performed by a qualified professional according to international standards. 

They argued that the boy was healing well during a three-day review and that the subsequent infection was a "secondary complication" caused by the family’s failure to maintain hygiene and follow medical instructions.

Dr Kisika Mwambu testified that the minor arrived at Bungoma West Hospital with gangrene and necrotic tissue in the circumcision wound, which he described as a rare occurrence. 

He suggested the condition could have been caused by poor surgical technique or inadequate post-operative management, noting that the wound was dirty and infected upon admission.

However, during cross-examination, he admitted he could not definitively determine if the negligence was committed by the circumciser or the patient’s family during home care. 

The defence, led by the hospital’s former medical superintendent Dr David Mauka, maintained that the clinician followed all procedures. 

He reiterated that the patient was treated and that all processes were followed. He further stated that there was also a duty on the part of the patient to practise self-care by cleaning the wound and taking the medication given, and that failure to do so would lead to complications.

“He stated that the complications arose after the surgery and that this constituted a secondary complication, as opposed to a primary one that would amount to negligence.”

In her ruling, Justice Ougo placed significant weight on the father’s admission that he noticed his son’s strange gait on December 2, four days after surgery, but did not alert a physician or return to the hospital. 

“This alone should have raised an alarm, since the other boy who had undergone the same procedure had fully healed. The court cannot comprehend why the plaintiff did not act swiftly,” the judge stated. 

She noted that the boy was under the care of an uncle during this period, but the uncle was never called to testify, leaving the court unable to establish what after-care steps were taken.

The judge pointed out that evidence from the doctor at Bungoma West Hospital who treated the minor, showed that the wound was “dirty, infected and gangrenous” on arrival, pointing to a lack of proper after-care. 

“I attribute negligence in this case to the plaintiff because of the manner in which he contributed to his son’s injuries. He did not escalate the matter soon enough.”

The suit was dismissed with the court declining to award any damages.