Psychiatric Medical Negligence Harder to Prove in the UK

Sadly, psychiatric medical negligence is harder to prove. This story is a great example of such negligence.


In early twenty fourteen a mother passed away at her home, even though through her recovery she seemed to be healing well. The original accident at her place of employment caused a stack of racking boards to topple onto the mother causing both podiatry and head injuries. The autopsy reported the mother had died from deep vein thrombosis and ensuing pulmonary emboli which had developed as a result from the original injury. It is evident the mother and daughter lived together with this case, as the daughter was very close to her mother. With an all clear from the hospital and then seeing her mother collapse then die, the daughter is surly distraught.

The daughter witnessed the death of her mother and suffered post-traumatic stress disorder which was significant. Because the daughter did not see the original accident, a determining factor in the case became the establishment of the relative event; the courts argued the daughter had not been present at the initial injury or accident scene. As a secondary victim the daughter was only able to see the collapsing and passing of her mother, an area where medical negligence will have a problem in the future.

The possibility for secondary victims to obtain damages done will only be able to tell the courts of the “secondary” parts of the events they had seen. Which will be a consequence later on as the medical psychiatric negligence’s come into the courts. To prove the awarding of damages for this type of medical negligence’s going forward, as a secondary victim, the individuals will have to prove to the courts the series of chain events which happened to the other person, causing them to have psychiatric injuries. This will be the guidelines going forward.

Even in cases of this, good note taking is a must. People who are able to document the lives of others before the court have a better opportunity in securing secondary victim status, which will allow the court system to award damages better. Being able to show how involved the person is in the victim’s life will also better sway the court system. Without the obvious involvement in their lives, the court will find a way to deny any claimants request for damages.

Recent changes in how the courts are handling and awarding damages may make cases of this nature near impossible to win. Having a doctor available to help with the claimants request for damages, is also a key. The doctor will be able to prove post-traumatic stress disorders better than any single person. Having this information available is a must if you plan to win as secondary victim.

For now in this case, the court has retracted the secondary victim award, due to the fact the court system pushed the daughter was not present for the initial accident, and therefore does not qualify for the damage award. However great her post traumatic experience was, the court is impasse about the situation. However, the court of appeals is working to get the damage award reinstated.

Make sure you seek the help of an expert if you suffer from psychiatric medical negligence.