Ralph Naderbolsinmattu 6 days ago

 

 

The NHS Litigation Authority lost 76% of cases it contested in court, causing distress and pain to thousands of patients damaged by negligence.

 

PlatoSays 9 days ago

 

 

For those who’ve enjoyed the Anna Raccoon blog and twitter account over a decade or more.

A superb lady with a remarkable life story.

 

Peter Wright 9 days ago

 

 

Free at the point of delivery or a lucrative taregt?

 

Kate Catleugh 9 days ago

 

 

There is a toxic chicken and egg situation here. Of course a cash-strapped NHS should not be paying enormous damages that result from expensive legal claims.  As things are now, the NHS very often will try and deny/defend/obfuscate to avoid the legal consequences of its actions. This of course not only escalates the costs but also prevents the lessons which should be learned from such errors to be learned.

If the NHS provides the remedies or reliefs needed as a consequence of it’s actions without charge anyway,  how much more rapidly, cleanly and efficiently this could happen if faults were admitted and rectified, as far as possible.  Where loss of life or hurt feelings are concerned,  surely an honest admission, a lesson truly learned and a prompt and sincere apology is far more appropriate than a long drawn out legal case and punitive financial damages awarded against the organisation least able to afford it without further jeopardising it’s ability to deliver for other patients.

 

Nick Simpson 9 days ago

 

 

My missus is a lawyer who spends her working week suing the NHS.  Go on, hate me.

Her typical client is a five year old with brain damage caused by an accident at birth.  By accident I mean a toxic combination of incompetence and stupidity. 

If such children die, compensation is minimal to non-existent.  The kids who really cost the NHS money are the ones that live, because they can live for decades unable to speak, walk, talk, feed themselves or wipe their own backside, let alone go to the shops or earn a living.  Someone has to look after them; and looking after them properly costs a lot of money.

The idea that the NHS treats everyone whose life chances are ruined in this way is absolute rubbish.  It doesn’t.

Legal Aid is no longer available for Clinical Negligence cases.  Lawyers must take such cases on contingency fee arrangements (No Win, No Fee).  That means lawyers like Mrs VoP have to decide very carefully which cases stand a reasonable chance of succeeding at trial.  She turns many down, because the alternative is to do a lot of work for nothing and unfairly raise the hopes of families.  Lawyers who push weak cases swiftly find out the consequences.

Yes, it’s true that Clin Neg lawyers are well paid (although not as well remunerated as doctors, whose average pensions are in the region of £50,000).  But the NHS could save enormous insurance fees by putting its own house in order.  Firstly, it could train its midwives properly (a common cause of negligence is that midwives are slow to grasp that a delivery might be in some way out of the ordinary).  Secondly, it could change the culture of defensiveness whereby doctors lie, cover each other’s backs and even alter medical notes in an attempt to avoid blame.  Thirdly, it could try making an early assessment of each allegation of negligence – Mrs VoP reports that again and again Trusts reject claims until a late stage of the procedure (presumably because to do so costs money and would involve medical staff being confronted with their mistakes), by which time the Claimants lawyers have spent tens of thousands which NHS insurers end up having to pay.

The reality is that, in an era where massive NHS failures are routine news items (a major one only last week), the fear of litigation exerts a powerful pressure on Trusts to raise standards.  Get rid of that if you like.  But don’t complain when clinical standards fall.

And by the way, no-fault insurance for medical accidents has been tried in other countries.  And abandoned as too expensive.

 

CM 9 days ago

 

 

Why in early can’t doctors and nurses be required to purchase their own insurance so insurance companies cover the costs? Do we even require this of our vastly over paid locums? It really is time to get rid of the vast state monolith and move to the perfect competition of multiple private suppliers paid by health insurance to drive up standards. I’d happily spend more on healthcare like they do in France if I knew the money followed the patient instead of creating loads of pointless back office non jobs for labour voters. The NHS is third world healthcare. No one who actually uses it regularly thinks it’s great except our many third world health tourists who really do get it for free, unlike the taxpayer, who pays over the odds for a third world service. I want healthcare as good as France’s or Germany’s. That means choosing and copying one of the several superior continental models. Get on with it.

Bobo08 9 days ago

 

 

@CM Insurance is business model that generates profit from premiums. So if doctors etc had to buy their own cover, then they’d ask for more pay to do so and the cost would actually increase. By self insuring, the NHS is saving money. It is as the article demonstrates, the ‘somebody must pay culture’ that drives these claims. My own wish would be that mistakes are recognised, lessons are learnt and corrections made to the process. 

THERESE PRIEUR 9 days ago

 

 

@Bobo08 @CM I am afraid that corrections made to the process belong to alternate universes.

 

Bryan Attewell 9 days ago

 

 

This lady deserves great credit for her stance on compensation culture. 

While there are no doubt some deserving cases, people in genuine need of financial support due to an error, too often this is seen as a route to easy money with cynical legal professionals stoking the fire.