Has anyone successfully sued the NHS?

[andco]

In response to the OP, yes - I do know someone that successfully sued to NHS, who actually didn't put up a fight as they admitted full responsibility and negligence and the family didn't want it dragged through the press (they could probably have pushed for more compensation but chose not to). A close family friend's baby died from a badly fractured skull during a botched emergency caesarian performed (unsupervised) by an unqualified surgeon - the whole thing was on tape. Notably this wasn't in Sheffield.

 

I bet the NHS Legal Department thought it was Xmas.

[SnifferDog]

Ok, I'll stick my head in the lion's mouth, so to speak, with this one. If the NHS is negligent it needs to be held accountable. I don't agree with people putting claims in for minor things, but in some cases for major things, ie when someone's quality of life is affected in any way then I agree with litigation.

 

I have read some of the posts on here with people defending the NHS and its lack of funds and therefore shouldn't be paying out litigation (not word for word but that is the general understanding) - the NHS has a lack of funds due to bad management, as well as less Government spending. Why should anyone who has suffered at the hands of the NHS and lost a quality of life they had before not sue ? Its not that persons fault if the NHS has a lack of funds - but it is their right to expect healthcare that will leave them in better health not worse.

 

Gillybob, I don't know why you wish to pursue litigation, nor do I want to, that is your private business, however I wish you every success.

 

This is an open forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion, this just happens to be mine xx

[AGB1]

I know this doesnt answer the OP's question but I thought I'd add this to the conversation anyway.

 

At medical school we were given a lecture in the first few weeks by a big, scary American lawyer, based in Manchester who specialises in suing NHS/health professionals.

The aim of the lecture (and the many after it) was to illustrate how much more common being sued is as a doctor.

(The national audit office estimated an increase in the value of clinical negligence claims from £78m in 1996/97 to £145m in 1997/98 and the Medical Protection Society estimates that a GP is now 13 times more likely to be sued than they were 10 years ago)

 

Basically his advice on how to avoid being sued came down to 2 points -

 

1)Keep the most meticulous notes possible (they are your evidence) and

2)Communicate with patients (listen listen listen!)

 

He was sure that the majority of us would be sued at least once in our career simply because doctors/humans are not perfect.

 

From my point of view I find it sad that people seem quick to move to litigation. However I do firmly believe that if a doctor communicates well and is honest with a patient then most cases can be avoided in the first place.

[Cuey]

How will taking money out of the system improve the system for the greater good, why not just file a complaint?

 

What did the private surgeon do that was so different to five years with the NHS?

 

Because we all know where complaints end up. Complaining to the GMC that would be the organisation run by doctors to administer punishment to doctors. No conflict there then. On the whole the GMC close ranks and protect the doctor not the patient. The only thing that really makes hospitals sit up and listen is a large amount of cash going out of the door. If that is the way to get there attention then that is what people will do. How many time do you hear about a doctor that got struck off and had got a dozen previous complaints.

 

What the private doctor appears to have done is listen and then make an accurate diagnosis. Something that the NHS should have been reasonable expected to do.

[Milly658]

Without a solicitor I'd say you've got no chance and I dont rate your chances much higher unless you've got a very decent solicitor behind you. Spend a day sitting outside the Royal Courts of Justice Advice Bureau - it's quite an eye opener on British Justice; they have a lot of clients who have been down the medical negligence route after receiving a right royal messing around all the way down the line.

 

Yes, get a solicitor. They in turn will send your notes to a surgeon (maybe 2) in the same field for their opinion as to whether it was down to negligence and whether it is worth proceeding with the claim.

[gillybob]

If you are concerned about the clinical care you have been given by a doctor, your complaint should be to the GMC who can address the doctor's training standards and impose conditions of practise upon them. They may even strike them off if they're a danger.

 

But wait! You won't make a quid or two out of that! Better sue the NHS bureaucracy which will have zero influence on the doctor involved but it's a nice little earner. The fact that your payment is taken from the general NHS budget shouldn't put you off in any way.

 

sad really, but if these people didn't make the mistakes, then patients wouldn't need to sue.

 

 

As a matter of fact i survived a serious car accident as a passenger 29 yrs ago, (no seatbelt laws then) i was happy to be treated with head injuries, eye op to remove glass, 70 stiches in my face and forehead, without local anesthetic, taking 3 hours to complete them, i think that even after 29 yrs, still removing glass from my face, i applaude the NHS for the good job they do in putting people back together after such trauma, so i suppose i can see both sides of the coin.

[AGB1]

Because we all know where complaints end up. Complaining to the GMC that would be the organisation run by doctors to administer punishment to doctors. No conflict there then. On the whole the GMC close ranks and protect the doctor not the patient. The only thing that really makes hospitals sit up and listen is a large amount of cash going out of the door. If that is the way to get there attention then that is what people will do. How many time do you hear about a doctor that got struck off and had got a dozen previous complaints.

 

What the private doctor appears to have done is listen and then make an accurate diagnosis. Something that the NHS should have been reasonable expected to do.

 

I think, if you research the situation, you'll find the GMC is in the midst of a huge change following Shipman et al. They want to be much more transparent and are very keen to get away from the image of 'doctors regulating doctors'.

[Milly658]

1)Keep the most meticulous notes possible (they are your evidence) and

2)Communicate with patients (listen listen listen!)

 

My colleagues and would totally agree with that one, and you would be surprised at how many 'possible' negligence cases are working their way through the system. Doctors/Surgeons have come to expect that someone probably will make a complaint against them sometime during their career. No one is perfect and those who happen to suffer because of a mistake that has affected their lives, have the right to be compensated. The decision whether someone has suffered negligence is not made by the GMC, it's made by the Court, based on the evidence available - which usually consists of an overview by a medical expert who has an oath to the Court... not the Doctor/Surgeon, nor the patient.

[scoop]

Let's look at it this way, my house caught fire, it doesn't matter how but my house caught fire. I called 999 and the fire service came to my aid, whilst rescuing me they broke the door down even though the lock could have been picked. Should I sue them for damaging my door?

 

I work in the NHS, I've know of parents who made a claim for the cost of the childs clothing after we'd had to cut it off to resucitate their child:loopy:.

 

That aside, we do have to accept that people who work in the NHS are human beings who make mistakes like any other, what is important to me is how people react when a mistake is discovered.

 

I think complaints procedures in hospitals are very important, as it allows us to investigate what went wrong and how we can prevent it from happening again.

 

Where someone sue's simply for the purpose of monetry compensation I start to have a problem.

We see people all the time looking for and exagerating problems and we all know why they've done it, but in the case of the OP, it seems that she has genuinely had a raw deal and has had to shell out alot of money to treat something that should have been done by the NHS, so sheis at the very least entitled to be compensated for that.

[gillybob]

sad really, but if these people didn't make the mistakes, then patients wouldn't need to sue.

 

Yes, what a shame that doctors aren't perfect and faultless. I take it that you have never made a mistake?

 

Have you actually contacted the GMC regarding the competancy of your doctor? Or did you just go straight to the solicitors?

 

i make plenty of mistakes, but not with other peoples health. a job i would not rellish at any cost.

GMC will come later i think.

i cannot talk about the case anyway!

thanks for your comments.