General Protect The NHS............

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
Sadly, a lot of cases are brought simply because those affected by mistakes/errors/misadventure cannot get any answers or explanations from the NHS without a legal approach being made.

I get that, but there isn`t always a definitive answer. Sometimes it is just "Sorry your child was very poorly and died".
Now if it was "Your child was negligently diagnosed, given the wrong drugs and died" then yes there is a case that can be brought and learned from.
However the NHS can`t save everyone, that`s just life. It is both precious and fickle.
 

Foley

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,137
£1.9 billion coming out of the health service ( or £83 billion) is madness.
The government were looking at giving sensible compensation for accidents.
Maybe some as standard compensation as possible, reducing the bill and getting g rid of all of the lawyers making £££'s out of this?
 

Foley

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,137
Oh and at the same time the culture of the NHS needs to move to a culture similar to Aviation.
So mistakes and near misses are investigated and the NHS learns from these, rather than the cover ups that do seem to happen sometimes.
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
Oh and at the same time the culture of the NHS needs to move to a culture similar to Aviation.
So mistakes and near misses are investigated and the NHS learns from these, rather than the cover ups that do seem to happen sometimes.

We do that already, and we are measured on it.
"Never Events" ,things like operating on the wrong leg, are also used as learning tools.
There is also the ability for any staff in surgery to "Stop the Line" if they see something is wrong.
The cover up allegations often surface when there are historical issues.
The reality is that folk did what was right at the time, hindsight is a wonderful tool!
 

Foley

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,137
We do that already, and we are measured on it.
"Never Events" ,things like operating on the wrong leg, are also used as learning tools.
There is also the ability for any staff in surgery to "Stop the Line" if they see something is wrong.
The cover up allegations often surface when there are historical issues.
The reality is that folk did what was right at the time, hindsight is a wonderful tool!
Is that new?
In the article attached the implication is that the NHS tried to hush up what had happened?
What's your view on the huge compensation paid out of the NHS?
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
Is that new?
In the article attached the implication is that the NHS tried to hush up what had happened?
What's your view on the huge compensation paid out of the NHS?

Stop it, unless there is genuine negligence or intent to harm and that would be a legal/police matter.
 

Marked Ox

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
16,302
Stop it, unless there is genuine negligence or intent to harm and that would be a legal/police matter.

They are legal issues though, hence the cost.

As has been said above, the NHS could save itself plenty by being more transparent as people are suing as the only way to get some answers rather than for any compensation.
 

Foley

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,137
They are legal issues though, hence the cost.

As has been said above, the NHS could save itself plenty by being more transparent as people are suing as the only way to get some answers rather than for any compensation.
Whatever the system needs a huge overhaul.
It cany be right that so many £billions are being paid out which could be used for operations, nurses etc.
The legal Bill's themselves are huge.
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
They are legal issues though, hence the cost.

As has been said above, the NHS could save itself plenty by being more transparent as people are suing as the only way to get some answers rather than for any compensation.

The vast majority of the cases are by Ambulance Chasing "Compo" Lawyers.
If people ask the questions in the right manner they get answers.
Use a service like Patient Advice & Liaison rather than alternative avenues.
Nobody in the NHS generally, with notable exceptions, goes to work intending to harm patients.
Sometimes the flow through the system can breakdown, is that down to an individual? Very unlikely.
"Compensation" is, in reality, papering over the cracks. They should be asking if the complainant A: Want to see the system improve? Or B: Take the ££££ and not care?

Too many of us are choosing Option B.

Try this case:
"Mr. William Ewan died in 2007, at the age of 86, following an operation to insert a trans-aortic valve. His estate (represented by GS) brought proceedings in negligence against the Trust alleging failure to give proper information as to the risks involved in the operation, and claiming that if appropriate warnings had been provided, Mr. Ewan would not have undergone surgery. Liability was accepted, but the case proceeded to trial on quantum. "

The patient was offered life saving surgery, no surgery he die`s anyway.
It`s heart surgery, it has risks.
He`s dead.......... he`s not going to benefit.
He was 86, he was going to die anyway, we all do.
He`s not able to give evidence, he`s dead!!

The lawyers profit............ nobody else.
 

Foley

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,137
The vast majority of the cases are by Ambulance Chasing "Compo" Lawyers.
If people ask the questions in the right manner they get answers.
Use a service like Patient Advice & Liaison rather than alternative avenues.
Nobody in the NHS generally, with notable exceptions, goes to work intending to harm patients.
Sometimes the flow through the system can breakdown, is that down to an individual? Very unlikely.
"Compensation" is, in reality, papering over the cracks. They should be asking if the complainant A: Want to see the system improve? Or B: Take the ££££ and not care?

Too many of us are choosing Option B.

Try this case:
"Mr. William Ewan died in 2007, at the age of 86, following an operation to insert a trans-aortic valve. His estate (represented by GS) brought proceedings in negligence against the Trust alleging failure to give proper information as to the risks involved in the operation, and claiming that if appropriate warnings had been provided, Mr. Ewan would not have undergone surgery. Liability was accepted, but the case proceeded to trial on quantum. "

The patient was offered life saving surgery, no surgery he die`s anyway.
It`s heart surgery, it has risks.
He`s dead.......... he`s not going to benefit.
He was 86, he was going to die anyway, we all do.
He`s not able to give evidence, he`s dead!!

The lawyers profit............ nobody else.
We are in a suing culture unfortunately.
The government need to cut this kind of thing out.
 

Marked Ox

Well-known member
Joined
6 Dec 2017
Messages
16,302
The vast majority of the cases are by Ambulance Chasing "Compo" Lawyers.
If people ask the questions in the right manner they get answers.
Use a service like Patient Advice & Liaison rather than alternative avenues.
Nobody in the NHS generally, with notable exceptions, goes to work intending to harm patients.
Sometimes the flow through the system can breakdown, is that down to an individual? Very unlikely.
"Compensation" is, in reality, papering over the cracks. They should be asking if the complainant A: Want to see the system improve? Or B: Take the ££££ and not care?

Too many of us are choosing Option B.

Try this case:
"Mr. William Ewan died in 2007, at the age of 86, following an operation to insert a trans-aortic valve. His estate (represented by GS) brought proceedings in negligence against the Trust alleging failure to give proper information as to the risks involved in the operation, and claiming that if appropriate warnings had been provided, Mr. Ewan would not have undergone surgery. Liability was accepted, but the case proceeded to trial on quantum. "

The patient was offered life saving surgery, no surgery he die`s anyway.
It`s heart surgery, it has risks.
He`s dead.......... he`s not going to benefit.
He was 86, he was going to die anyway, we all do.
He`s not able to give evidence, he`s dead!!

The lawyers profit............ nobody else.

I'll just leave the quote from the article in question as we are using anecdotes:

Suzanne White, from the Association of Personal Injuries Lawyers, said people came to her on a daily basis with no intention of suing the NHS.

But she said they often found it difficult to get answers from the medical authorities - and were left with no other option but to sue.

"What they want to do is find out what went wrong, why they have received these injuries... and to make sure it doesn't happen to other patients."
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
I'll just leave the quote from the article in question as we are using anecdotes:

Suzanne White, from the Association of Personal Injuries Lawyers, said people came to her on a daily basis with no intention of suing the NHS.

But she said they often found it difficult to get answers from the medical authorities - and were left with no other option but to sue.

"What they want to do is find out what went wrong, why they have received these injuries... and to make sure it doesn't happen to other patients."

As I said there are ways and means to get an answer but often it is almost impossible to discover what exactly went wrong thanks to the consequence`s of one action or inaction.
 

Essexyellows

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
5,417
Here is a fresh one, from our Chairman in his monthly update:

"Every month I will be writing to you with an update from our Trust Board and sharing news of key Board activities. At our first meeting of the year, we heard the story of a patient who had previously had a stroke, was wheelchair bound and had been admitted to the Emergency Department in January 2019. He was in poor health and died without his family having the opportunity to be present which they feel would have given him and them comfort in his last moments. I know from personal experience the sense of loss when a close family member dies and whilst it is a sad reality that some of our patients will die in hospital, there are important learning points from this patient story which apply to all parts of our clinical services.
The Trust Board had the opportunity to listen to a member of the patient’s family and one of the consultants in the Department and ask questions. A situation like this can be difficult for families and staff alike and I was pleased to hear we are learning from it and that the multi professional team in the Emergency Department has responded by improving the communication with relatives of patients who have a life limiting illness through initiatives like the Butterfly Project. I would like to thank the family and staff involved in sharing the story and everyone working so hard to make improvements in this important area of care."

So was a mistake made, or the patient may have had a DNR and therefore wasn`t kept alive, and the family weren`t able to get there in time.

Obviously we learn from it.

Will the family sue? I`ll let you know................
 

Paul Cannell

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
3,190
I do wish you'd stop apostrophising plurals.

But seriously, the NHS is amazingly reluctant to accept fault, hence it's attitude to whistleblowers, one example being that of Raj Mattu, which despite the article linked being 6 years old rolls on with the NHS continuing it's persecution of the whistleblower and his supporters and covering that up (go and buy Private Eye to keep up).
 

Paul Cannell

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
3,190
Here is a fresh one, from our Chairman in his monthly update:

etc

Summary: I think your points probably cover the majority of cases, but until the NHS becomes 'truly open' (ffs) the right to sue remains the way of last resort that patients or relatives can get information or change practice. That's how it should be, rule of law and all that, it would be horrendous if this government (or any other body) was able to only accept the cases it chose.
 

ZeroTheHero

Well-known member
Joined
7 Dec 2017
Messages
4,803
How about making the 'financial compensation' part of suing a hospital/trust less attractive? The care given to my dad at the end of his life was very questionable, and my mum made sure the doctors/healthcare visitors/nurses were aware of the fact and as a result there was an official surgery meeting/case review - the minutes of which she received afterwards. They did address her complaints, and set out what they would do to at least try to ensure such things would not happen again. He was pretty old and very ill - but he could have had a much better time in his last months. I'm sure the idea of suing the NHS never went through my mum's mind, it was acknowledgement that things had gone awry and an apology that she wanted and got - his care might not have been 'negligent', but it was certainly far less than satisfactory . That way of handling things seems to be a good model to me - it was pretty open, no leeches were involved in trying to suck money out of the health service and (hopefully) the next person that finds themselves in a similar situation will get better care.
 
Top Bottom