Maternity services in the spotlight: Ockenden Review and Maternity Reporting

Written by Senior Solicitor, Trevor Ward

The publication of the Ockenden Review into maternity services over nearly 20 years at the Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust raised again the question of the standard of maternity services in the UK.

Whilst the report illustrated widespread and cultural issues at this particular Trust, history tells us (Morecambe Bay, Wales) that these issues are unlikely to be isolated to Shrewsbury and Telford only.

Context

There are about 700,000 births per annum in England and Wales. 40% are first baby and most have no issues. 90% are single pregnancies beyond 37 weeks gestation and with baby’s presentation head first.

Approximately 5% of the overall pregnancies will have a complication of gestational diabetes and 8-10% will have the complication of hypertension and will need careful management.

Principle maternity investigations

The National Maternity Review published its initial findings in 2016 and led to The Maternity Transformation Programme. The scope of the review was to assess current maternity care provision and consider how services should be developed to meet the changing needs of women and babies.

It made proposals to make care safer and to give women greater control and more choices. Key areas were identified

• Personalised care
• Continuity of carer
• Better postnatal and perinatal mental health care
• A better payment system (for Trusts)
• Safer care
• Multi professional working (breaking down barriers between midwives, obstetricians and other professionals)
• Working across boundaries

The Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB) is tasked with conducting independent investigations of incidents in NHS-funded care across England. It has been recognised for some time that most harm in healthcare results from problems within the systems and processes that determine how care is delivered.

In relation to maternity services and maternity investigations, HSIB carried out investigations from 1st April 2018 through to December 2019. Essentially HSIB investigations replace Trusts’ internal responsibility for investigating, although each Trust remained responsible for exercising its Duty of Candour and referring particular incidents to HSIB in the first instance.

In the above period, HSIB investigated over 1000 incidents of which 280 investigations related to maternity services (plus another 146 investigations in the period being checked for factual accuracy but not concluded at the time of the report).

Various themes were identified:

• The need for early recognition of risk
• The safety of intrapartum care
• The appropriate need for escalation
• Handover issues between shifts/colleagues
• The problems associated with larger babies
• Dealing with neonatal collapse
• Group B streptococcus
• Cultural issues

In February 2022, the Care Quality Commission published its results for the 2021 Maternity Survey. Responses to the survey were received from 23,000 women with an increase in online reporting during the pandemic. It did report year on year improvement with positive benefits reported in continuity of care, mental health support and interaction with staff. However, problems were identified in other areas.
If one reads the investigation report, one can see that the same themes as in 2016 and as reflected in the Ockenden Report and HSIB resurface –

• Lack of personalised care and review in the antenatal period
• Too rigid adherence to maternity pathways for initial low risk pregnancies
• Breaking boundaries to allow for ‘fresh eyes review’
• A recognition that 2018 MBRRACE-UK a 5-fold increase in mortality for women of black ethnic origin and 2-fold increase for women of Asian ethnic origin

The Sunday Times reported on 10th April 2022 that almost half of NHS maternity services in England are unsafe. They suggested that babies’ lives were at risk because maternity units were still unsafe years after families raised concerns about preventable deaths resulting from poor care.

Of the 193 NHS maternity services in England, 80 are rated as “inadequate” or “requires improvement”, meaning they do not meet basic safety standards.

Parents whose babies died avoidably have said they feel guilt that other families have suffered the same fate because hospitals have not investigated incidents and improved care.

Conclusion

There will be continual learning from these and further planned reviews and reporting – it is too expensive to society in all respects not to do so. We must all continue to strive for adequate time for staff and adequate resource of both staff and facilities for ongoing maternity services In England and Wales.

Trevor Ward is a Senior Solicitor and the Head of the Birth Injury Unit at Fletchers Solicitors, as well as the Chief Assessor for The Law Society’s Medical Negligence Panel. If you or your baby has suffered due to negligence, we can guide you through the legal process – call us now on 0330 013 0251.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/408480/47487_MBI_Accessible_v0.1.pdf

https://gov.wales/independent-maternity-services-oversight-panel

Life After Injury – Dave Holdsworth

Over the past three years we have acted on behalf of Dave Holdsworth, who lost his arm in a motorcycle accident. Today, we are delighted to announce that Dave’s case has recently settled, allowing him to continue moving on from his injuries.

Dave was involved in a motorcycle accident whilst out riding with his son, having to be airlifted to hospital. Unfortunately, his arm couldn’t be saved and he underwent transradial (below the elbow) amputation. We shared Dave’s story last year, whilst during his intense rehabilitation he trialed the ‘Michelangelo hand’, which features built-in technology to allow more natural hand movements. He has shown great determination in moving on from his injuries and recently purchased an adapted recumbent bike to help motivate him with his physical rehabilitation.

Dave commented on how there was a ‘bittersweet’ feeling to the settlement of his case, and thanked his solicitors Louise and Kirsty for all their work.

For once I am lost for words, this email has took me a day or two to write as I know it has some finality too it. I hope you do pop your head round the door and say hey every so often, that would be nice.

Well, I was going to be wax lyrical about how this journey was made so much easier knowing that you and Kirsty were my legal representatives, showing a professional, knowledgeable, and above all patience that belies your years. But I won’t, you’ll have to settle for a very heartfelt THANK YOU.
There is a bitter sweetness to it all being over.

Our deepest gratitude
Dave and Julie

We wish Dave and his family all the best in the future.

Watch Dave trialing the Michelangelo hand below:

Green light for the ‘solicitor super exam’

Written by Dylan Caldwell, junior litigation executive in the medical negligence department. 

In March 2018, the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE), also known as the ‘solicitor super exam’ was given the green light by the Legal Services Board. It is an attempt by the SRA to freshen up the qualification process of becoming a solicitor and removes the necessity to complete the Legal Practice Course. The SQE will be broken down into SQE stage 1, SQE stage 2 and qualifying work experience. Its aim is to widen participation and utilise talent.

There are arguments that the current cost of the LPC and GDL restricts a number of applicants and that the SQE would therefore broaden access to those who may be restricted due to funding issues. However, one may believe this is a false illusion given that an undergraduate degree or equivalent will still be required prior to an aspiring solicitor sitting the SQE which has huge costs attached itself.

The SQE will encompass talent from various undergraduate degrees who wish to sit the exam given there is no requirement for the undergraduate degree to be law. Nonetheless, it can be questioned whether an undergraduate with no legal background will have the required knowledge in order to pass either stage 1 or stage 2 of the SQE.  The LPC is the course which facilitates the legal knowledge learnt as an undergraduate into the necessary practical skills to be a successful solicitor. Removing the LPC has therefore attracted strong criticism as to whether qualifying solicitors will have the high level of knowledge required to be successful in such a demanding profession.

Many believe that the new centralised system is needed to stay up to date with current times and will embrace modern programmes such as legal apprenticeships. There is no doubt that the SQE will have a huge impact in removing the negative stigma which is wrongfully attached to those wishing to qualify as a solicitor without a legal background.  The new centralised system will also help bring consistency to the profession which the SRA believes is lacking.

It is proposed that students who have started a qualifying law degree, LPC or GDL equivalent will be able to continue with the ‘old route’ of qualification until 2031. With the increasing criticisms from legal providers and numerous law firms regarding the SQE, there are concerns that those who have continued under the ‘old route’ will be favoured when selecting trainee solicitors in the near future.

The legal profession is currently saturated by those who have an LPC and who are competing for a limited amount of training contracts. The implementation of the SQE will do nothing to alleviate the argument that the profession will become increasingly saturated due to the predicted increase in those who will sit the SQE.

It is clear the SQE has divided opinion. One thing is for certain, both sides of the table need to come together for the SQE to work as intended by the SRA. Unnecessary difficulties will be distasteful to say the least as it will have a negative impact on those at the heart of the change, aspiring lawyers.

Fletchers Named One of the Best Places to Work in the UK!

We’ve proud to announce we have been listed as a Sunday Times Best 100 Companies to Work for in 2017, for the second year running.

The Sunday Times praised our strong training and development strategy, as well as our wide range of employee benefits, including the flexi-time policy and colleague-nominated awards.

This hard-fought and celebrated list represents the top 100 companies in the ‘mid’ category with the highest Best Companies Index scores. We have achieved an impressive score of 702 and placed 85 on the prestigious list.

The annual ranking from The Sunday Times and Best Companies is widely acknowledged as one of the most extensive studies into employee engagement in the UK. All the scores and ratings are based on employee opinions and every year the questionnaires are revised to reflect the current workplace concerns.

Ed Fletcher, our CEO, said: “Making the list is a huge accolade for the team and entirely supportive of our vision of achieving Top 100 law firm status by 2018.

“We work hard to create an environment in which our talented team can flourish. As well as offering outstanding training programmes and career development opportunities, we understand the importance of fostering an excellent working environment and culture. Our reward, recognition and employee wellbeing schemes have helped grow the firm from 90 to 370 people in just four years. Our people are at the heart of everything we do and we’re proud that our efforts have been recognised in The Sunday Times highly esteemed list.”

Claiming for GBS infection in the Newborn: Practical Guide

This series will provide a concise set of guidelines to assist those considering bringing a claim in relation to treatment that they have received. Whilst these notes cannot countenance every potential scenario they will hopefully identify the fundamental stages and help to remove any uncertainty surrounding the process.

Should I claim?

christian-beadell-head Christian Beadell, senior solicitor at Fletchers writes about the decision around making a medical negligence claim in relation to Group B Strep.

In the circumstances where there has been a failure to diagnose or treat a GBS infection, it can be difficult to decide if a claim can or should be brought.  Whilst the outcome of negligent misdiagnosis can sometimes be fatal, in some circumstances it can be unclear if any damage has been caused if a baby has still been delivered safe and well. In those circumstances, the decision can be less obvious.

A claim can be brought by any party that has suffered injury and/or loss as result of negligence.  This can include primarily the child, the mother and less commonly a spouse or partner who may have witnessed traumatic events. Often it is the case that a claim by the mother who has suffered an mishandled pregnancy and potentially traumatic delivery is overlooked in favour of pursuing a claim on behalf of the child and it is important that this is considered from the outset.

Fortunately, even if you are concerned in relation to your treatment, an immediate decision on commencing legal action does not have to be taken.

Any claim for compensation must be brought within specified timescales and this varies depending upon whether or not the claimant is the mother or the child (or both).

The usual rule is that a claim must be brought within 3 years of the date when the negligence occurred or when you knew or ought to have known that there had been failings in the treatment and that this had caused an injury (whichever is the later date). Very often in GBS claims, this will be at the time of delivery but can be earlier.

As indicated above, an otherwise healthy child may go on to develop abnormalities which present at later stages.  These are most often highlighted at the early developmental milestone checks. Sometimes the advice will be to wait for those milestones to be reached before a decision on pursuing a claim is made.

It is important to note that the 3 years’ time limit does not start until a child reaches the age of 18. In their case, the deadline for bringing a claim is usually their 21st birthday.

As this does not apply to an adult claimant, it is always our recommendation to seek legal advice as soon as possible, even if you are unsure if you have a claim.  An experienced lawyer who has dealt with GBS claims will be able to tell you if the circumstances of your treatment merit investigation.

At Fletchers Solicitors, we pride ourselves on the quality of our lawyers and will ensure that you enquiry is directed to our GBS team. If you’ve suffered any kind of negligence relating to GBS, please don’t hesitate to call us now on 03300 080 321 to talk to someone who’ll understand what you’re going through. Or alternatively, you can fill out a form here.

Blog: NHS funding pledge, is this a matter of too little, too late?

Written by Assistant Litigation Executive, Nina Taylor

 

A&E waiting times have risen by a third since last July, new figures published on last Thursday show.

 

This is a disturbing trend that highlights the blurring between the winter crises and ‘quieter’ summer months. While the current government has pledged £1.8bn to upgrade the infrastructure and equipment, is this a matter of ‘too little, too late’?

 

Dame Donna Kinnair, Chief Executive and General Secretary of the Royal College of Nursing said:

 

Cash for new buildings is always welcome, but the NHS desperately needs more staff to cope with these peaks in demand.

 

Whereas, Dr Rob Harwood, Chair of the British Medical Association Consultants Committee said:

 

The recently announced spending for the NHS is welcome, if that indeed represents new investment. But frankly, these figures suggest that much more is needed if the performance of the NHS is to be restored.

 

While the NHS say they see on average 2,300 people a day within 4 hours, official figures say differently. The number of patients waiting more than 4 hours rose by 35% to 57,694.  Moreover, Patients waiting more than 12 hours almost tripled from 149 to 436.

 

Attendances at A&E are also up by 4% from last year with 2.7 million attendances. As the UK’s population ages, experts believe that by 2040 nearly one in seven people will be over 75.

 

Do we need to look elsewhere for a viable solution?

hero_medneg_nhs

Northern Ireland’s figures (March 2019) show on average that almost two thirds of patient treatment / discharge /admittance fell within 4 hours. As a result, 95% saw their care needs assessed for the first time by a medical professional within 36 minutes of arrival.

 

Clearly in cases where early diagnosis is key (such as sepsis and cauda equina), we know from experience that these delays can have catastrophic consequences for our clients. The sooner the diagnosis, the better their outcome.

 

While pledging £1.8bn is a start, it is hopefully not a one off payment and instead the start of a reinvestment scheme into our NHS following over 10 years of austerity and budget cuts.

Bereavement damages – Unmarried woman wins legal battle

[lead]Yesterday a woman in Lancashire won her legal battle for better rights for unmarried people who lose their long-term partners. Jakki Smith’s partner of 16 years died in 2011 when an infection was missed by medics, however she was denied bereavement damages.[/lead]

Nicola Winslett, a senior solicitor within our medical negligence department commented on the case “This is a long overdue review and should bring the law in line with social behaviour. Co-habiting was the fastest growing family type in the UK according to the Office of National Statistics in 2015, accounting for 16.4% of all family units in the UK. With nearly 3 million opposite sex and 84,000 same sex co-habiting couples in 2015 this indicates the size of the population affected.

This case brings the bereavement award, which is awarded by the Fatal Accidents Act 1974, in line with the Law Reform Misc Provisions Act 1934 which allows a co-habitee of 2 years to claim compensation against the party who may have caused the death of their loved one for the loss of financial support and care. Until now those persons have not been able to claim the statutory award for the bereavement.

On a practical note the probate laws will still present challenges as the surviving co-habitee is not the “first in-line” to bring a claim for the pain and suffering of their loved one prior to death unless the deceased left a will but yesterday’s development is potentially a step towards a more equal future.”

Read the full coverage of the case here.

Teaching Assistant receives £80,000 settlement after two avoidable surgeries caused mobility loss

A 46-year-old woman who fell over in her garden has received an £80,000 settlement after experiencing two avoidable surgeries that has reduced her mobility.

On 26 August 2015, the Teaching Assistant attended Pinderfields Hospital Accident and Emergency ward after awkwardly falling and injuring her left elbow.

The claimant was diagnosed with a fracture (the left complex inter-articular distal humeral fracture) which required immediate open reduction and internal fixation surgery.

A couple of weeks after the surgery, the claimant returned to Pinderfields Hospital for a review where she shared symptoms of pain.

The surgeon noted there was significant swelling which resulted in a wrist drop (a medical condition in which the wrist and the fingers cannot extend at the metacarpophalangeal joints) and advised the claimant that the team that completed her stitching had caused the damage.

In December 2015, the claimant underwent nerve conduction studies which showed a left radial neuropathy and a left focal ulnar neuropathy at the elbow.

By 20th August 2016, the claimant was still suffering with a wrist drop, numbness and did not have any finger extension.

She was then referred for further nerve conduction studies.

On 12th January 2017, the claimant underwent a new, explorative procedure where the plates were removed from her arm before later undergoing tendon transfer surgery.

Fletchers Solicitor’s Medical Negligence Litigation Executive, Stephanie Davies, who represented the claimant against The Mid Yorkshire Hospital NHS Trust said:

“I hope the compensation that the claimant has received will go towards helping her and her family move forward from this ordeal and assist the claimant in adapting to her reduced mobility.

“This case highlights the importance of a surgeon taking appropriate care when performing all types of surgery.”

“The Claimant now suffers with permanent wrist drop due to the radial nerve palsy injury which causes pain, swelling and has comprised her ability to use her left hand.”

Speaking in conclusion to the case, the claimant said: “I would just like to say how brilliant Stephanie Davies has been.”

Terminal breast cancer patients “abandoned” amidst NHS specialist nurse shortage

By Saima Mazhar, Senior Solicitor in the Medical Negligence Department at Fletchers

The charity organisation, Breast Cancer Care recently reported that around 72%, almost three quarters of NHS Trusts across the UK, fail to provide dedicated nurses to terminally ill breast cancer patients as a result of a shortage of specialist nurses.

This is shocking given that you would think such support is available for patients with incurable disease when it is most needed.

The charity only saw a 7% increase in the provision of such support by trusts, since last looking into the issue some two years ago. The charity’s findings are disappointing particularly given promises by the government’s cancer strategy three years ago, that all cancer patients would have a designated nurse by 2020.

The Chief Executive, Samia al Qadhi reported on how this illustrated the degree to which NHS care for those with incurable breast cancer had stagnated, stating… “After this life-changing and life-limiting diagnosis patients continue to be abandoned without the ongoing, specialist support they need to manage complex treatment and debilitating side effects, like chronic pain and fatigue.

“People living with incurable breast cancer tell us that access to a specialist nurse is the single most important aspect of their care and without it they feel isolated, forgotten and invisible.

“So today’s failings must not be swept under the carpet.

Ms Qadhi urged the government to provide the funding that would enable people access for specialist support for when it is most needed.

Cancer Research has reported that 1 in 2 people in the UK born after 1960 will be diagnosed with some form of cancer during their lifetime. It appears to be on the rise and the risk of developing cancer depends on many factors including age, genetics and exposure to risk factors. It goes without saying that specialist nurses are therefore needed more than ever to care and support for those suffering from cancer. We all know of someone close to us, whether this be a friend or family who has been diagnosed with cancer, and would hope that the NHS has provisions in place to make the journey after such a daunting diagnosis as easy as possible through a dedicated support network of medical professionals, including specialist nurses.

Breast Cancer Care reported that less than half of the trusts were able to confirm statistics in relation to breast cancer patients in their care. Additionally a large percentage of trusts failed to assess emotional and physical needs at diagnosis and during the duration of treatment. There was a failure by a large proportion of trusts to provide patients with a debrief following each treatment and how they had responded to it.

It is unfortunate that the charity has identified areas where patients suffering from serious illness are being failed in terms of basic care and support that could make their journey less difficult. Access to dedicated 1:1 support from specialist nurses could bridge any such gap.

In the UK there are an estimated 35,000 people living with secondary breast cancer. Around 11,500 people die from the disease each year yet the NHS appears to be failing to provide these patient with the crucial specialist care and much needed support at a time when it is most vital. A push for funding from the government would enable NHS Trusts to plug this hole and make the government’s cancer strategy for all cancer patients to have a dedicated nurse by 2020, a reality.

The duty of candour – slow and steady progression

By Andy Tindall, Litigation Executive in the Medical Negligence team

After the publication of AVMA’s report on the inspection and regulation of the duty of candour earlier this month, the NHS’s ability to implement one of the fundamental standards of care and the CQC’s ability to ensure compliance, was once again put under the microscope.

The report can be accessed by clicking the following link:

https://www.avma.org.uk/

In a sector which, largely in the past, has been considered by some to be rather ‘paternalistic’ in its handling of patient transparency, the findings of this report are encouraging and show NHS Trusts increasing overall willingness and adherence to their duty to be open and honest with their patients when mistakes occur.

However, the report does also highlight inconsistencies amongst Trusts’ implementation of the duty, especially when it comes to complete compliance and knowledge/ awareness amongst staff and patients.

In order to completely adhere to the duty of candour, the following must occur:

  1. The victim of the incident must be notified as soon as practically possible
  2. An apology must be offered
  3. The victim must be provided with support after the incident and they must be included in the incident investigation

A written notification must then be provided in person, including an apology, with an accurate and comprehensive account of the incident and the victim must also be advised of the relevant enquiries that can be taken regarding the incident as well as any results from the investigation.

In a number of the CQC reports that were analysed by AVMA, it was identified that certain Trusts failed to adhere to all aspects of the duty of candour requirements; for example conversations with individuals were not recorded or there was evidence of an apology but not a written one. This is something which I have personally come across when reviewing medical records as part of my role as a Litigation Executive. The clinical notes may include reference to a ‘duty of candour conversation and apology given’ but a written apology is then not provided.

The importance of a full and frank apology, both verbally and then followed up in written format, cannot be underestimated and is often a source of comfort and appreciation for victims of medical mistakes. By adhering in full, not only do Trusts prevent themselves from regulatory action but it also ensures that the public can have confidence in an open and transparent system.

A further issue that came out of AVMA’s research into the CQC reports was lack of staff knowledge and training. This is concerning, especially given the varying amounts of knowledge between different Trusts.

It would seem that the most appropriate solution to this problem would be to ensure that universal and mandatory duty of candour training is provided to each Trust to ensure a consistent understanding of the meaning and importance. In addition, regular refresher sessions and information leaflets for both staff and patients (which it must be noted has been implemented by a number of Trusts) would also ensure a full and up-to-date knowledge.

It is important to reiterate, that despite the areas that require improvement, a large percentage of Trusts follow good practice and implementation of duty of candour awareness in an environment with increasingly stretched resources. However, consistent application amongst all Trusts is the key to ensuring overall public confidence and allowing lessons to be learned from when mistakes are made, resulting in future prevention.

The impact of cuts to legal aid on access to justice

Written by Eliza Esiategiwa, Assistant Litigation Executivat Fletchers Solicitors. 

The legal aid funded civil law sector has been plagued by funding cuts since the mid-2000s. Between 2006 and 2009, legal aid was imperilled to a new fixed-fee system by the government. This was followed in 2011 by a 10% cut in fee rates across all legal aid services .  The cuts enforced by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012 came into effect on the 1st April 2013.[1] The introduction of this Act was aimed at cutting the legal aid budget by £350 million mainly in areas of clinical negligence, immigration and family law. The cuts were announced despite opposition from the public, the legal profession, law society and the House of Lords.   In addition, it added that in no win, no fee agreements the losing side no longer pays the success fee, claimants would now pay it out of their damages.[2]

21st century Britain has a growing number of people who are unable to defend themselves; between 2009 – 2010, more than 470,000 people received advice or assistance for social welfare services issues, but by 2013 – 2014, after the government’s reform to legal aid, the number of people seeking legal advice had fallen to less than 53,000 – a drop of nearly 90%. [3] It is apparent after the enactment of this Act that the cuts were neither beneficial nor proportionate and it has hindered access to justice for a large group of people who are mostly vulnerable.  The government is currently undertaking a review into the effects of LASPO into the legal aid system, which is expected to be published by the end of 2018; we look forward to this review.

Britain’s most senior judge Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd stated recently  “our justice system has become unaffordable to most.”[4]  Therefore, the notion of access to justice seeks to emphasize that it is an imperative that the system needs to be challenged. The system has shifted to economic needs i.e. the narrative that legal aid cuts are unavoidable rather than focussing on the narrative that legal advice/aid is a necessity in a civilised society. [5]

According to a recent BBC investigation, it has found that up to a million people live in areas with no legal aid provision for housing, with a further 15 million in areas with one provider. Richard Miller, head of justice at the Law Society, states that legal advice across England and Wales was “disappearing, creating legal aid deserts.”[6]

The impact of the cuts to legal aid involves the shift in government policy – the decline in social regard for the welfare of the community and individual needs. Policy restrictions in legal aid, changes in government policy combined with punitive law and order agendas will damage the fundamental understandings of due process and the rule of law – the underlying basis of access to justice.[7]  The conservation of the rule of law rest on the power of all people to have basic equality of access to the law. “If some cannot access justice because it is beyond their means, then the rule of law everywhere suffers.”[8]

To conclude, the impact of cuts to legal in aid has led to a mounting crisis in our justice system. The importance of legal aid to access to justice was captured by Amnesty, “Legal aid gives a voice to the unheard and light to those overlooked. Without legal aid the marginalised are kept in the shadows. They cannot be seen and they cannot be heard.”[9]

 

[1] Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012

[2] Access to Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Cuts to Legal Aid

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/16/legal-aid-review-lack-of-access-to-justice

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/16/legal-aid-review-lack-of-access-to-justice

[5] Access to Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Cuts to Legal Aid

[6] Legal aid advice network ‘decimated’ by funding cuts

[7] Access to Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Cuts to Legal Aid

[8] https://www.thejusticegap.com/2016/11/labour-lambasts-government-access-justice-crisis-following-legal-aid-cuts/

[9] Sarah Sadek of Avon and Bristol Law Centre: https://www.thejusticegap.com/2016/11/labour-lambasts-government-access-justice-crisis-following-legal-aid-cuts/

Trainee Solicitor believes Blackpool hospital murder inquiry reopens fresh medical negligence concerns

A Blackpool-based pensioner’s stroke-murder inquiry “could have been avoided” and “could be down to a lack of care”, claims Trainee Solicitor.

Kim Jackson, trainee solicitor for Fletchers Solicitor’s medical negligence department, believes the recent probe into Valerie Kneale’s death is another damning indictment into elderly care in some UK-based hospitals.

Mrs Kneale, who died at Blackpool Victoria Hospital on 16 November last year, sustained an unexplained injury which experts now believe could have contributed towards her death.

Although the cause of Mrs Kneale’s death is yet to be confirmed, police investigating the incident have opened a new murder inquiry.

Kim said:

“It is worrying to see patients in their most vulnerable state being potentially neglected when they require care the most.

“Patients who suffer a stroke rely so heavily on their care providers to provide the treatment and management they so desperately need.”

A close up of the hands of an elderly person, with their hand resting on their knee.

Despite the fact no arrests have yet been made, a police spokesperson said on Wednesday 20 February that one of the examinations involved former Blackpool pensioner, Mrs Kneale.

Kim continued:

“Negligence is not only limited to treatment provided, but also the inability to provide treatment and care.

“It could well prove that a lack of care by the care providers has resulted in such a sad and avoidable outcome here.”

According to research by the Guardian, the number of strokes in the UK is predicted to rise by 44% in the next 20 years as a result of the aging population.

Kim concluded:

“With this in mind, care needs to be proactively provided to ensure that any deaths that are related to, or potentially related to negligence like Mrs Knowles, are avoided in the future.”