Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Negligence Payouts In The Nhs - Acceptable?
16 Answers
It's a big organisation so sums are not going to be small but last year the Damages payments to claimants – excluding PIDR was £1.4 Bn with total costs for Payments in respect of clinical schemes equalling 2.3 Bn.
Total provision for claims is a staggering £84 Bn,
This is money paid into the NHS that wont be spent on Healthcare.
Thoughts?
The report can be found here: https:/
Total provision for claims is a staggering £84 Bn,
This is money paid into the NHS that wont be spent on Healthcare.
Thoughts?
The report can be found here: https:/
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
i dont understand your question - what is PIDR? (sorry i can't open the link). Is the report saying that £84B is put aside but only~£2B is used?
Anyway, i reckon if you've had your life altered by a mistake or deliberate act, the payout probably doesn't seem enough, but some people sue for not much reason
Anyway, i reckon if you've had your life altered by a mistake or deliberate act, the payout probably doesn't seem enough, but some people sue for not much reason
If the claims are being paid out it is because somebody employed by the NHS have been negligent - this should never happen but people are not robots.
If somebody is left needing 24 hour round the clock care for the rest of their life because of negligence, then it is right that a large amount of compensation is awarded.
Sadly, these claims and the courts decisions have resulted in the decision making of treatment being passed to the patient. I find this worrying and frustrating. I am not a medical expert and will never properly understand the best treatment for me if I become ill. I don't want options - I want the expert's opinion on what is best for me and I want the expert's guidance.
If somebody is left needing 24 hour round the clock care for the rest of their life because of negligence, then it is right that a large amount of compensation is awarded.
Sadly, these claims and the courts decisions have resulted in the decision making of treatment being passed to the patient. I find this worrying and frustrating. I am not a medical expert and will never properly understand the best treatment for me if I become ill. I don't want options - I want the expert's opinion on what is best for me and I want the expert's guidance.
this was the system brought in around 20 y ago
the nationalised body NHS was insured by another govt body ( indemnity thingey - Clin Neglig something)
Previously the doctors paid for their own negligence ( MDU ) and the Hospital just sort of paid - and the GMC struck off the bad doctor - and the hospital went on doing it
it was quickly realised that bad doctors werent the issue in systems errors - such as the govt decision to clear the Hospitals of old but covid+ pts and infect the rest homes
or the english ebola outbreak where the PHE ( soon to be dissolved as not up to the job and poor Paul Cosford will be out of a job) successfully transferred liability to a doctor and nurse
"But despite a high temperature - a warning sign of the virus - Dr X agreed to a lower value being recorded." The Beeb hack didnt understand the evidence and Dr X did NOT write the figure in the notes. Neither did nurse Y. One of the PHE staff refused to give evidence on the grounds of self incrimination. [I was there]
such is British Justice in the 21st century
I dont see that there is a useful change in the offing
the nationalised body NHS was insured by another govt body ( indemnity thingey - Clin Neglig something)
Previously the doctors paid for their own negligence ( MDU ) and the Hospital just sort of paid - and the GMC struck off the bad doctor - and the hospital went on doing it
it was quickly realised that bad doctors werent the issue in systems errors - such as the govt decision to clear the Hospitals of old but covid+ pts and infect the rest homes
or the english ebola outbreak where the PHE ( soon to be dissolved as not up to the job and poor Paul Cosford will be out of a job) successfully transferred liability to a doctor and nurse
"But despite a high temperature - a warning sign of the virus - Dr X agreed to a lower value being recorded." The Beeb hack didnt understand the evidence and Dr X did NOT write the figure in the notes. Neither did nurse Y. One of the PHE staff refused to give evidence on the grounds of self incrimination. [I was there]
such is British Justice in the 21st century
I dont see that there is a useful change in the offing
oh the provision figure is confected
EU acct rules demand a figure if every claim matured and needed pay out on a certain date ( like tomorrow)
[this means the NHS pension fund since there is no pot and is paid from year to year with profit TO the govt - is in deficit by £400bn (figure from tax payers alliance who seem to believe it)]
as with most NHS finance it is all mirrors and smoke
EU acct rules demand a figure if every claim matured and needed pay out on a certain date ( like tomorrow)
[this means the NHS pension fund since there is no pot and is paid from year to year with profit TO the govt - is in deficit by £400bn (figure from tax payers alliance who seem to believe it)]
as with most NHS finance it is all mirrors and smoke
Indeed ymg,that figure is staggering and has been so as long as I can remember.
There is no slack in the NHS amd an absentee isn't replaced putting added burden on others. One is always under pressure to see more patients ,perform more operations and this leads to corners being cut and this is when mistakes are made.
I know of no doctor who hasn't been sued at least once in his/her professional career.
Patients expectations are sometimes unachievable and this may lead to legal intervention.
There is no answer to this problem.
There is no slack in the NHS amd an absentee isn't replaced putting added burden on others. One is always under pressure to see more patients ,perform more operations and this leads to corners being cut and this is when mistakes are made.
I know of no doctor who hasn't been sued at least once in his/her professional career.
Patients expectations are sometimes unachievable and this may lead to legal intervention.
There is no answer to this problem.
Among all the UK authorities, institutions, etc., the NHS is the one most obviously (but not necessarily most urgently/breathtakingly) in need of a serious overhaul. Far too many of them seem grossly inefficient and ineffective but there is very little incentive because of the cultural state of denial: The UK is by definition the best (World Beating, etc.) at everything and anything. Most/all of them are a collection of plaster-on-plaster adjustments over decades if not centuries. They blunder along a bit like a snowball rolling down a snowy hill, no particular direction just gravity/momentum in charge. As we know, there is serious resistance to emulating any foreign models which work better.
yep. I never could get why we were given a budget every year and told that we were expected to give IIRC 1.5% of it back at the end of the year. Mostly OT and physio came in on budget but never gave back a penny and nursing was always overspent. Every year that we didn't hand back the 1.5% it was rolled over to the next year so that year we were expected to give back 3% like that was EVER going to happen
// I know of no doctor who hasn't been sued at least once in his/her professional career.//
a proud boast of theirs
- o god I do - the ones who disappear up the corridor shouting "not me not me! I am not here!" (at the first sign of any trouble)(*)
a paed has an average of three - -- showing at once the case load has no relation to how good or bad they are
oh if you are talking about dissatisfied patients butchering their doctors - the psychiatrists and plastic surgeons are on top pf the list
oh unless you mean their private patients have sued them. I cannot possibly comment.
(*) and then I regret pointing the finger at some other doctor at any inquiry ( internal, coronial, GMC, civil action, criminal action, public inquiry, royal commission or s84 inquiry)
a proud boast of theirs
- o god I do - the ones who disappear up the corridor shouting "not me not me! I am not here!" (at the first sign of any trouble)(*)
a paed has an average of three - -- showing at once the case load has no relation to how good or bad they are
oh if you are talking about dissatisfied patients butchering their doctors - the psychiatrists and plastic surgeons are on top pf the list
oh unless you mean their private patients have sued them. I cannot possibly comment.
(*) and then I regret pointing the finger at some other doctor at any inquiry ( internal, coronial, GMC, civil action, criminal action, public inquiry, royal commission or s84 inquiry)
Compensation is meant to leave the claimant in the same financial position as they would be but for the error/omission.
As I understand it, if a lump sum is awarded, there is a presumption the money would then be invested and gain interest.
If the person is estimated to have lost £1,000,000 over the rest of their life, they would receive less than that (the PIDR is deducted) because the interest on the lower amount would top it up to the million pounds.
As I understand it, if a lump sum is awarded, there is a presumption the money would then be invested and gain interest.
If the person is estimated to have lost £1,000,000 over the rest of their life, they would receive less than that (the PIDR is deducted) because the interest on the lower amount would top it up to the million pounds.
Yes, TCL. I think the provisions have become much greater because the assumed discount rate is now -0.25%. Yes, it's negative. So an even greater lump sum is needed to give the annual amount needed,e g in care costs.
https:/
https:/
1 to 16 of 16
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.