The possibility of clinical negligence is not something most people wish to think about when they or their loved ones become ill and require medical or clinical treatment. We all would prefer to put our absolute trust in the doctors and nurses the vast majority of which are extremely competent and caring. However, it is surprising how common clinical negligence has become.
The NHS Litigation Authority is an organisation that deals with medical negligence claims against the NHS. It also works with the trusts to minimise the prevalence of negligence throughout the NHS. The trust announced that, in 2008 to 2009, as many as 6,080 clinical negligence claims were made against the NHS. This was up from the 5,470 claims made the previous year.
All health professionals are obliged to follow the code of duty of care; to do otherwise is both wrong morally and is punishable in law. Any breach of the duty of care opens up the medical practitioner to a medical negligence claim is as a result any harm is sustained.
Making a medical negligence claim is a highly complex process which should only be undertaken by lawyers versed in the field. An excellent resource that provides a vast amount of information on the subject is Irwin Mitchell. In addition to providing a substantial body of information on the subject, there are a huge number of detailed case studies.
In a very recent case study, a patient with Crohn’s disease underwent a procedure to remove part of his colon and was provided with a temporary stoma. Following recovery, a further procedure took place to reverse the stoma, which means reconnecting his colon. In normal circumstances stoma reversal is a relatively simple procedure, but in this case a terrible error was made.
Instead of reconnecting his colon, the surgeon had connected his ileum to a bladder diverticulum, which is a pouch in the wall of the bladder, instead of to the end of his colon. He was in hospital a month with a series of complications and it was no longer possible to reverse the stoma, so it became permanent.
The case was perused by Irwin Michel solicitors who obtained compensation for him of over £44,000. The case was settled out of court.