A former midwife who was acquitted of the manslaughter of two babies during home births has been admitted as a barrister and solicitor in South Australia’s Supreme Court after an initial rejection.
Key points:
- Lisa Barrett was found not guilty of two counts of manslaughter in 2019
- She had since applied to become a lawyer in the South Australian Supreme Court
- A board initially found she was “not fit” to practice law, but later reversed that decision
Lisa Jane Barrett stood trial in 2019 over the deaths of two babies during home births in October 2011 and December 2012.
At the time, prosecutors argued Ms Barrett was grossly negligent in the advice she gave the mothers and failed to inform them of developing emergencies that required urgent hospital transfers.
Justice Ann Vanstone found while Ms Barrett’s conduct fell short of a competent midwife, it did not amount to criminal negligence.
She was found not guilty of the charges, but a 2013 ban from the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner on Ms Barrett practising midwifery stood.
ABC News
)Initial application denied
This year, Ms Barrett applied to the Law Society of South Australia to undergo a standard evaluation by its board of examiners.
However, with concerns about her conduct during her midwifery career, the board found Ms Barrett was not a “fit and proper person” to practice law.
It considered that “a number of serious errors of judgment” had been made in her career as a midwife.
“She also intervened in an inquest in 2011 in a manner which was initially regarded as inappropriate.
“In addition, the applicant did not attend a proceeding in the South Australian Health Practitioners Tribunal which was, likewise, initially regarded as inappropriate.”
Board reconsiders after more evidence presented
Ms Barrett appealed the board’s decision, presenting further evidence and explanations for the areas of concern.
ABC News
)In its reports, the board said Ms Barrett had “acknowledged that her previous conduct was unsatisfactory, and it accepted that she had learned a great deal about the issues in which she had been involved as a result of her work experience and legal studies”.
It noted Ms Barrett had not been convicted of any criminal offence, and there was no suggestion of dishonesty, despite “adverse findings” made by the Health Practitioners Tribunal.
The board also found Ms Barrett was “open and frank” in response to its questioning and that she intended to pursue law “as a means of helping people”.
“There were persuasive, positive character references which attest to her integrity, forthright manner and desire to assist those who are vulnerable in society and work towards social justice.”
After reviewing the matter this month, the Full Court — comprised of President Livesey, Justice Blue and Justice Bleby — found Ms Barrett was a fit and proper person to practice law and said she would be admitted.
She will undergo two years of supervision, as per rules for all newly admitted practitioners.
Posted , updated
