gillybob Posted December 5, 2007 Author Share Posted December 5, 2007 hi, maybe sueing them will improve the NHS, i would say not, but it's not all about the money, i don't want anyone else to have to go through what i went through. we put our trust in them, and they bodge a patients life. some lives are damaged forever, i think these pople deserve some compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daven Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Accidents happen, and in those that lead to serious consequences I could agree with some form of compensation being paid. You have said your in the process of suing the NHS and are trying to gage your chances of sucess. You have also said you injured yourself and was provided with 5 years of care (NHS therefore at cost to the taxpayer-not you), although was misdiagnosed. How can you sue for a misdiagnosis, medicine is an everchanging art, a misdiagnosis is not a reason to sue. Shame on you! If you want to do something positive, campaign for better access to medical information for all in the trade. Very eloquently said! When someone loses their health they often look for someone to blame and doctors are soft targets. Medicine IS an everchanging art and there are far too many people who jump on the'blame' and 'revenge' bandwaggon. However, I do feel that it should be easier for medical notes to be easier to access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womerry2 Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Taking money from the NHS is justified only in order to pay for care that cannot be provided by the NHS and that has become necessary because of a fault in the NHS system. Claiming "compensation" of any other kind is, in my opinion, morally reprehensible and shows a profound lack of understanding of what the NHS is and does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olec Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Whateh you lot doctors eh sommet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Whateh you lot doctors eh sommet? QUOTE] Yet again, an inexplicably bizarre and ridiculous posting from Olec. The NHS recently saved my mother's life - she would certainly be dead by now were it not for their care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 can any one answere this then, i worked all my life, paid my taxes, and my NI, so when the NHS who promise to treat me to a standard, with all their medical experience (paid wages by all taxpayers) but do not finish the job and i have to go else where to get the job finished so to give me a good quality of life!!! why should they get away with this. i put my faith in them diagnosing and treating my problem.... i paid in the first place to get this treatment. so no, "misdiagnosis" is not an option. pass me to someone else for god sake, who does know what they are doing. isn't there enough specialists in the NHS? Nobody can answer the question as to why life isn't fair... it just isn't. Diagnosing medical conditions isn't straightforward and mistakes will always happen. The problem isn't a lack of specialists in the NHS but a lack of flawless demi-gods, which is what people seem to expect. If the mistake is the result of negligence then compensation should be considered only if it is required to fund additional private care resulting from the neglect. The bottom line is that that any payment made to you is at the expense of others using the NHS service. There is no bottomless money pit and therefore NHS trusts have to make hard decisions about where to spend their budget each year. With millions set aside for compensation payments and legal fees this means that many trusts choose to limit the availability of certain drugs (just one example) as you can see here. The result is that other NHS patients do without treatments and in some cases die sooner than they need to. That's the reality of compensation payments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siân Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 Taking money from the NHS is justified only in order to pay for care that cannot be provided by the NHS and that has become necessary because of a fault in the NHS system. Claiming "compensation" of any other kind is, in my opinion, morally reprehensible and shows a profound lack of understanding of what the NHS is and does. So someone who's wage is needed for survival (whether for a family or just their own) who as a result of a mistake made whilst in the care of a doctor (or other healthcare professional) should only be able to claim for medical care not available on the NHS? Not for loss of earnings s/he may suffer (& it does happen)? I'm glad the law doesn't agree. I don't see why it makes any difference if the doctor works for BUPA or the NHS if the outcome is the same for the patient. A decent solicitor experienced in this field would soon weed out if someone had a case or not. I wouldn't have thought it was an area that your 'no win no fee' type outfit would be interested in - they like quick easy money, with minimum work. Not long drawn out cases as these often are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 If you lost a child at the hands of the NHS would you be happy with a "oh dear I'm sorry"?? Would you think oh well I should have gone private it's my own fault? Even though the NHS is a not for profit organisation they have a care of duty and should be competent in the job they are doing. An apology wouldn't make up for the loss but neither would a new BMW. The NHS does indeed have a duty of care. Individuals should of course be accountable, and lessons learned, where there has been neglect. But paying out compensation after that doesn't make things any better. If you were being denied treatment, drugs or care because of the cost then someone driving around in a shiny BMW courtesy of the NHS wouldn't be much compensation to you would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 I don't see why it makes any difference if the doctor works for BUPA or the NHS if the outcome is the same for the patient. The difference is simple. If you sue BUPA it deprives shareholders of some profit. If you sue the NHS it deprives othe NHS users of care and in some cases it deprives them of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daven Posted December 5, 2007 Share Posted December 5, 2007 The difference is simple. If you sue BUPA it deprives shareholders of some profit. If you sue the NHS it deprives othe NHS users of care and in some cases it deprives them of life. Very true - this is something everyone who is jumping on the 'find someone to blame' bandwaggon should consider. However, most of those willing to do so wouldn't give much thought to anyone else anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.