Tag Archives: medical negligence cases

How Does a Lawyer Make a Difference in a Medical Negligence Case?

The number of medical negligence cases in the United Kingdom is growing by the thousands each year as hospitals continue to be understaffed and overstretched. But a local solicitor in York has warned that patients, especially those who have suffered from injuries as a result of medical negligence on the part of one of more staff members at a hospitals or clinic, are not going to put up with it anymore.



Many of these individuals are using different detective methods to uncover the truth, not only about their own injuries, but also the injuries of others, and they’re using this information to build cases that will help them get them the compensation and the justice that they so rightly deserve.

The solicitor’s office in York began working with medical negligence victims in 2011, and since that time has recovered millions of pounds for those who have sustained injuries as a result of medical negligence. In 2013 alone, the firm recovered more than £11 million for victims of medical negligence by hospitals and other health care providers.

One of the main sources of empowerment, according to this solicitor, for victims of medical negligence, is the internet. Primarily internet research is helping patients who were not involved in their treatment get the justice they deserve. There are many cases of informed consent override in medical facilities today and doctors are not providing patients with all of the information or options to make an informed decision.

But patients now have the internet and can dot heir own research prior to agreeing to a certain type of procedure or treatment. Even more important, especially to the legal process, is that the internet can help people who are investigating how and why their treatment went wrong. This may be even more important in the cases of deaths caused by medical negligence in certain types of procedures. People who have sustained injuries due to a certain type of medical treatment or the actions of a nurse, doctor, or other caregiver may be able to find other individuals who have had the same experience, answers about the incident, and possible solutions or other doctors and providers that can help them.

Informed consent still remains the primary issue of concern, and knowing all of the risks, concerns, and possibilities associated with a given treatment will forever remain a patient’s right.

Source – https://www.medicalnegligenceassist.co.uk

Medical Negligence Cases Can Be Systemic

Everybody needs to play their part if medical negligence cases are to be significantly cut and lives saved. Health workers who see malpractice, need to report it every time. Health management need to act on those reports immediately and decisively. Patients, their families and lawyers, also need to pursue malpractice in order to make accountability a fact within the NHS. Prevarication and ‘cover up’ not only makes matters worse, but also undermines public faith in the NHS as a whole.


The symptoms of a sick NHS were diagnosed in a recent report into a medical negligence case, by the RCS, Royal College of Surgeons. Fellow surgeons and nurses repeatedly reported malpractice by 3 senior surgeons at hospitals in Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells. Health managers in the trust repeatedly failed to act, on these reports. People died from postoperative complications as a direct consequence of this inaction.

The RCS went over the heads of the local health management and stopped indefinitely, keyhole surgery for stomach cancer. Five patients who underwent this procedure died, when ordinarily they should have lived, in January 2013. The surgery will not resume until improvements to the procedures can be proven by the trusts involved.

The most worrying aspect of the RCS report, that was published in full, only on May 15th, was that health professionals other than the 3 named surgeons had put their concerns in writing. They had been doing so for at least 2 years prior to the deaths. Small wonder the relatives of the deceased patients are calling it a cover up. The full report of the cases was only made public because of this publicity.

The surgeons under scrutiny are continuing to do general surgery just not the keyhole variety that is at the heart of the negligence allegations. They were cited in an unsigned letter as being guilty of ‘dangerous and unethical practices’. The letter went to the senior health managers at Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells.

The culture at the centre of the allegations was described as one of poor relationships between senior surgeons, irresponsibility in the care of patients and secretiveness around the care regimes of patients which made it difficult to look after them properly. There were improbably high numbers of complications following the keyhole operations. These were ineffectively managed afterwards and too many difficulties in contacting the surgeons when they were needed for care consultations. The idea that a prolonged exposure to moderate doses of oral PDE5 inhibitors, such as , may not only provide temporary advantageous effect, but also cure sexual impotence completely has long ago been suggested in scientific literature. However, the cases of complete recovery using only PDE5 inhibitors have not yet been studied with due attention. I have chronic asthma. I’ve tried a lot of drugs in my life. Well, in my experience, Ventolin is effective only for mild attacks. In more severe situations, I have to use “heavy artillery”. This is my treatment regimen. If you use the drug as prescribed, there will be no problems. Every tool should be used at the right time.

Worse than all of this was the sluggish and inadequate response of hospital management to the staff concerns raised at the time. It seems the 3 doctors involved were beyond sanction for whatever reason. It is now at the stage where medical negligence lawyers are to take action against the trust and are investigating a total of 20 deaths following keyhole surgery.

It is an unfortunate indictment of the NHS that things have gone this far. It points up the fact that negligence can arise from systemic sources. In this trust, procedures were (are?) set up for the benefit of the surgeons and staff rather than the patient’s care needs. RCS investigations continue.

Source: https://www.medicalnegligenceassist.co.uk

Handling of Medical Negligence Cases Needs Serious Changes

Parents of children who have been injured as a result of medical negligence are speaking out with claims that the process of litigation is advantageous for the doctors but that it is too difficult and burdensome for the families who must go through the process. Parents who are most negatively impacted by the current process are typically those with children who have suffered a catastrophic injury due to the medically negligent actions of doctors and other medical caregivers while receiving treatment or post treatment for injuries and illnesses, or through routine physical and medical evaluations.

medical negligence

Ms Justice Mary Irvine, a judge in the High Court, indicated that families who have come through her court do not feel that they are receiving fair treatment, and those families whose children have suffered brain damage as a result of medical negligence feel an even greater sense of grievance towards the litigation process and how they have been treated throughout the process. The judge indicated that major delays in litigation and the pushing through of case through the court systems is a major part of the dissatisfaction that families, especially parents, feel when they make a legal claim against a doctor or other medical caregiver for medical negligence. This, the judge indicated, makes individuals feel dissatisfied with the process from the beginning, and not much can be done to change their feelings without significant changes to the system. These changes may require disclosure rules and protocols that help to resolve cases earlier and also facilitate the ability of negligent medical providers to admit their liability earlier in the process when there is already an expectation that they will admit liability and settle the case.

Comments from Ms Justice Irvine came in response to recent litigation regarding permanent damage to a child that was caused by medical negligence during the delivery of the child at her birth. The case took more than three years to come to a close and the hospital refused to concede liability until that time. The judge, and others, have indicated that the lengthy amount of time required for some cases to be settled is regrettable because families need the monetary settlement that comes through litigation in order to pay the expenses related with medical care and lifetime care, especially in situations where the injuries are catastrophic, and cause lifelong suffering.

There is a current belief that liable parties are continuously denying liability, even when liability is obvious, as a strategic legal tactic. This tactic may be used for a wide variety of reasons, but the purpose is clear: to halt, lengthen, or completely stop the proceedings so that the families may become overwhelmed and give up on litigation all together. The process of litigation is exhausting for families who have children experiencing serious complications due to medical negligence and this alone can cause families to give up the fight if the litigation takes too long—many years in most cases—to come to a close.