UK: The CMO´s Report - Action Points

Last Updated: 14 October 2003
Article by Bertie Leigh

The Chief Medical Officer’s Report on reforming clinical negligence litigation is a far reaching and thoughtful paper. It contains a great deal of useful information, but it is not a White Paper and various aspects of it are unlikely to be implemented in the present financial climate.

Redress I

For example, the ‘Redress’ Scheme for clinical negligence claims is closely modelled on the NHSLA’s ‘Resolve’ Pilot Scheme. The limit is higher but otherwise the ideas in it are fairly similar. Under ‘Resolve’ Claimants are able to make an application, the merits of which are assessed in private by someone appointed by the NHSLA and compensation may or may not be forthcoming. Claimants do not lose their right to sue.

The merit of ‘Resolve’ is that it provides a way of distributing money to people who have been damaged by the Health Service at a fairly low cost. The demerit of it is equally simple: it is all new trade. None of the Claimants in ‘Resolve’ would have brought a claim through conventional litigation. If the state wishes to divert NHS money towards compensating these sorts of people as a deliberate of policy, ‘Redress’ provides a good model.

There are two disadvantages. The first is that according to research in this country, which is consistent with findings in America and Australia, there are about 850,000 significant adverse events every year. It may be that only half of them are avoidable and that a significant proportion do not cause long-term damage. Nevertheless this suggests that there are still about 250,000 – 300,000 people who could make a claim through ‘Redress’.

If each of them were to receive half the upper limit proposed by Sir Liam Donaldson, expenditure on these cases would be over £3 billion per year.

Furthermore, it is part of the policy adumbrated by Sir Liam that the NHS has a duty to unearth these cases through its risk management procedures and to be candid with the Claimants. In other words, there would only be any savings out of the total liability for the scheme insofar as it failed to achieve its objective.

Another problem with the scheme is that a tiny proportion of Claimants agree with the NHSLA’s initial assessment of the value of their claims. Damages for the injury itself are largely codified by past decisions, but the greater part of the awards are in respect of loss of earnings or the cost of putting things right. These claims can only be assembled by skilled lawyers who examine the precise circumstances of the Claimant. The result is likely to be a considerable expansion in legal cases albeit confined only to quantum, since liability will have been conceded at the outset. Even if half the Claimants accept the LA’s offer in ‘Redress’, there will be something like a 20-fold increase in litigated claims.

Redress II

As far as the scheme for cerebral palsy is concerned, there are two significant disadvantages. The first is that the scheme would abandon fault as a basis for allocating resources without moving to need. The CMO is mistaken in describing the present system as a lottery. It may be inaccurate, but it does as well as human wisdom can, allocate resources on a just basis. To give some money to all children who suffer an injury at birth, but not those who suffer a similar injury a week or two before is to embrace the mechanics of a lottery. There are only two fair bases for allocating resources in this field: fault or need and this falls between the two stools.

Redress III

The proposed scheme would hope to attract Claimants by offering a superior version of NHS care and about half of the damages that the Court would on other bases. Such an award would be unlikely to attract anyone with a well-founded claim against the Service and the Judge would refuse to approve the settlement as being in the baby’s interests if they did. Thus one must expect that this scheme as well would attract new claims without significantly reducing the volume of conventional claims.

What is happening?

During the consultation period people will be likely to look closely at what is actually happening to the existing system. The volume of claims to the NHSLA has now fallen in two successive years. Sir Liam Donaldson reports that the average claim is now taking 14 months to settle, a radical improvement on the state of affairs apparently unveiled by the National Audit Office Report two years ago. The number of claims to the GMC fell by 13% last year. The scare stories provoked by a confusion between the NHSLA’s reserving policy on the basis of government accounting standards and the cost of claims per year have now been exposed.

If those developments continue, society is likely to conclude, like most of the professionals involved, that the system isn’t broke and doesn’t need fixing, at least by such radical measures. Whilst there is a justice in the idea of a remedy for every wrong that is suggested by ‘Redress’, there are other calls on NHS resources which are a much higher priority, such as funding the Service. There are several proposals in the Report which could be acted on by individual Trusts now and which should be considered carefully.

  1. There should be a Board member on every Trust who has direct responsibility for managing claims at local level and learning the lessons from the event.
  2. This is already happening in the vast majority of Trusts and those where it was not set up in the wake of the Organisation with a Memory now look increasingly isolated. This is an important point and laggards should fall into line.

  3. The Service should acknowledge a duty of candour to victims of adverse events.
  4. This is an idea for which the legal profession can claim some credit. It was first advanced by Lord Donaldson more than 20 years ago. It was embraced by the MDU 16 years ago and by the NHSLA in 1997. The GMC caught up in 1998 and it has now been overtly endorsed by the Department of Health. If the lawyers and those who manage litigation spotted it first, everyone else has fallen into line.

    It does not matter how this would sound in damages, it must be clearly understood that the Health Service recognises an obligation to level with the victims of its misfortunes and to explain what has happened and why insofar as it can. Trusts should act on this by making sure that their staff are aware of the changing culture.

  5. Staff should be told that they will not be disciplined if they own up to their shortcomings unless it involves activity which is criminal or implies that they will be unsafe in the management of patients in the future

Here the CMO has trodden in uncertain territory. There has been a genuine disagreement in the Service for over 30 years about this issue. Some feel that unless this carrot is offered medical staff will not own up to their misfortunes, and it is much more important to get the data in to prevent a recurrence than it is to discipline the miscreant. Others feel that it sends a hopelessly confused signal and that staff should be told that they must disclose shortcomings and that they will be disciplined if they do not. Generally speaking the tide of opinion is flowing in the latter direction. We do not advise employers to give any such inducements to their staff at the moment because they may subsequently wish to embrace a tougher policy and will be criticised for having given confused signals by staff who claim to have relied upon them.

One proposal that Sir Liam Donaldson has made which we hope will be heartily endorsed by everybody connected with the Service is the repeal of the provision whereby the availability of the NHS to meet the needs created by an injury should be ignored when considering the reasonability of a claim for private treatment. This leads to the NHS having to pay money to enable private treatment to be purchased, without creating any obligation on the recipient not to use the NHS to meet the need. Thus we sometimes find the Service being forced to pay for private medical treatment by way of compensation and then providing that treatment itself. We think there never has been any justification for departing from the simple common law rule that the Claimant’s entitlement to this sort of money should be judged on a simple balance of probabilities and that the courts should apply the usual rules about a duty to mitigate a loss which are thought good enough in every other area.

Overall we must recognise that Making Amends is a box full of ideas and the Service should ensure that the more modest ones are not wasted, simply because the big ideas are beyond the means of the Service for the time being.

© Hempsons 2003

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions