An NHS redress scheme was unveiled yesterday by the chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson. It includes "no-fault" compensation for babies born with severe brain damage, and payments of up to £30,000 without litigation for patients whose treatment goes wrong.
The overhaul of compensation for medical negligence would also put NHS staff under a "duty of candour", obliging them to inform the patient if errors occur during treatment. Staff who report incidents with a view to improving patient safety would be given immunity from disciplinary action.
The report, Making Amends, takes into account responses by patients, NHS staff and the public to a consultation document published in 2001. Sir Liam, who was assisted by an advisory committee in drawing up the scheme, said: "Patients deserve to be told what has happened when things go wrong, and to be compensated if appropriate.
"However, we know that cases take too long to settle, that more is spent on legal costs than in compensation in many cases, and that many complainants are left fundamentally dissatisfied.
"Effective handling of clinical negligence claims is part of delivering a better quality health service. Where mistakes are made we must learn from them and use them as a driver for change."
Bills for clinical negligence have soared up from £53.2m in 1990-1 to £446m in 2001-2. The proposals will apply to England, but are expected to be extended throughout the UK.
Much of the annual budget for negligence cases goes on legal costs. In more than half of cases where claimants receive compensation of £35,000 or less, the legal bill is larger than the award.
Parents of babies born with "severe neurological impairment" such as cerebral palsy will be able to claim compensation without having to prove a hospital's negligence. Most cases result when babies are deprived of oxygen through failures during the birth process, but in other cases the cause is unknown.
Brain damage at birth accounts for 5% of compensation claims but 60% of the clinical negligence budget. Most are settled for lump sums of between £2m and £5m.
Under the scheme, parents would get a managed medical care package for their child, monthly payments for other care of up to £100,000 a year, lump sums for home adaptations and equipment of up to £50,000, and compensation for pain and suffering capped at £50,000.
The other arm of the redress scheme, for smaller negligence claims, would provide a package including an explanation and apology, remedial treatment, rehabilitation and care where needed, and financial compensation up to £30,000 where authorised by a new body that will replace the NHS litigation authority and administer the scheme.
Claims will be investigated by experts, and payments will be made where serious shortcomings in the standards of care and the harm could have been avoided. The scheme may be extended later to cover GPs and to provide for a higher maximum award.
Patients retain the right to sue in the courts if they prefer, but if they accept a settlement under the scheme they lose the right to litigate - though it is expected to pay legal costs for a lawyer to approve the offer.
David Marshall, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, said: "We have always said it is important for injured patients to be able to retain their right to litigate if they wish.
"It is vital, though, that patients are given freedom to consider any offer with an independent lawyer who can help to ensure the patient receives the most suitable package."
The overhaul of compensation for medical negligence would also put NHS staff under a "duty of candour", obliging them to inform the patient if errors occur during treatment. Staff who report incidents with a view to improving patient safety would be given immunity from disciplinary action.
The report, Making Amends, takes into account responses by patients, NHS staff and the public to a consultation document published in 2001. Sir Liam, who was assisted by an advisory committee in drawing up the scheme, said: "Patients deserve to be told what has happened when things go wrong, and to be compensated if appropriate.
"However, we know that cases take too long to settle, that more is spent on legal costs than in compensation in many cases, and that many complainants are left fundamentally dissatisfied.
"Effective handling of clinical negligence claims is part of delivering a better quality health service. Where mistakes are made we must learn from them and use them as a driver for change."
Bills for clinical negligence have soared up from £53.2m in 1990-1 to £446m in 2001-2. The proposals will apply to England, but are expected to be extended throughout the UK.
Much of the annual budget for negligence cases goes on legal costs. In more than half of cases where claimants receive compensation of £35,000 or less, the legal bill is larger than the award.
Parents of babies born with "severe neurological impairment" such as cerebral palsy will be able to claim compensation without having to prove a hospital's negligence. Most cases result when babies are deprived of oxygen through failures during the birth process, but in other cases the cause is unknown.
Brain damage at birth accounts for 5% of compensation claims but 60% of the clinical negligence budget. Most are settled for lump sums of between £2m and £5m.
Under the scheme, parents would get a managed medical care package for their child, monthly payments for other care of up to £100,000 a year, lump sums for home adaptations and equipment of up to £50,000, and compensation for pain and suffering capped at £50,000.
The other arm of the redress scheme, for smaller negligence claims, would provide a package including an explanation and apology, remedial treatment, rehabilitation and care where needed, and financial compensation up to £30,000 where authorised by a new body that will replace the NHS litigation authority and administer the scheme.
Claims will be investigated by experts, and payments will be made where serious shortcomings in the standards of care and the harm could have been avoided. The scheme may be extended later to cover GPs and to provide for a higher maximum award.
Patients retain the right to sue in the courts if they prefer, but if they accept a settlement under the scheme they lose the right to litigate - though it is expected to pay legal costs for a lawyer to approve the offer.
David Marshall, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, said: "We have always said it is important for injured patients to be able to retain their right to litigate if they wish.
"It is vital, though, that patients are given freedom to consider any offer with an independent lawyer who can help to ensure the patient receives the most suitable package."
This article is courtesy of theguardian.
No comments:
Post a Comment