CONSULTANT TREATMENT OUTCOMES

A recent initiative has been set up whereby patients can now check how their consultant is performing, as you can look at their results for a range of operations and treatments to help you make decisions about your care.

There are a number of specialities involved, although not all yet and it is hoped to roll out the scheme further.

You can use this data to decide which consultant to choose for your care.  

 
Unfortunately not all experts details are listed as some consultants have refused to let their results be published. 

All in all this has to be a good thing for patient choice.

DO YOU THINK THERE IS A COSY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND INSURERS?

This point was put to Work and Pensions Minister Lord Freud in the House of Lords who denied there is a “cosy relationship between Government and the insurance industry” recently telling members of the House of Lords that he talks regularly to victims’ groups and lawyers.

The denial came after the Lord Bishop of Ripon and Leeds asked the Minister what part “sufferers themselves, their relatives and support groups will play in managing what sometimes comes over as an agreement and arrangement between Government and insurance agencies”.  Lord Wills, a former Justice Minister, asked the Minister if he recognised “the deep sense of injustice felt by so many that the insurers are refusing to pay 100% of all claims to all those who are entitled to them?” in a debate about the Mesothelioma Bill in the House of Lords. 

Of course the Prime Minister himself posted a cosy meeting with just insurance representatives in February 2012, inviting representatives from the Royal Bank of Scotland, Admiral, AXA, Aviva and Zurich Financial Services but no claimant lawyers group were present! 

Perhaps you should be the judge......

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE EXPERTS

There has been a warning reported in the Law Society’s Gazette by leading clinical negligence lawyers of the risks arising from growing numbers of personal injury practitioners looking to carry out their work.

Legal Consultancy Zebra has reported a tenfold increase in enquiries about setting up or expanding medical negligence cases since the beginning of the year.  The majority of those contacts came from personal injury firms hit by cuts to fixed fees for RTA claims.

Clinical negligence solicitors say that cases in their sector require specialist knowledge and major investment to ensure they are handled correctly. 

Zoe Holland, Managing Director of Zebra Legal said: “the temptation for some firms is to consider placing their experienced personal injury solicitors into the role of clinical negligence risk assessor.  Unless the assessor has significant experience in this field, or has a medical background, this scenario is set to fail.”

David Jones, Senior Partner and Head of Clinical Negligence at Morgan Jones & Pett and a member of the Law Society Personal Injury Panel/APIL Accredited Clinical Negligence Specialist said “it is important clients are educated and know that the lawyer they are seeing is a specialist in this complicated field”.  Morgan Jones & Pett has joined SCIL (Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers) which now has more than 100 firms as members and is pressing for a quality mark to inform clients they are instructing a specialist.

It is obviously important to ensure that you look to instruct a specialist firm which Morgan Jones & Pett are, being consistently recommended in the Legal 500 and having Law Society Panel Members carrying out the clinical negligence work within the practice. 

Cosmetic Surgery

Cosmetic surgery encompasses an enormous range of procedures, from relatively minor interventions to major surgery. In 2005, the cosmetic sector was worth £720m, by 2010 it was valued at £2.3bn and by 2015 the sector is forecast to grow to a value of £3.6bn.

It may therefore surprise most readers, that the current regulatory framework places no restrictions on who may perform nonsurgical cosmetic procedure and no qualifications are required, this is so even though the non-surgical end of the market is growing rapidly, and was estimated to account for more than nine in ten cosmetic procedures and almost three quarters of market value in 2010. For example, non-surgical cosmetic procedures such as the injection of dermal fillers and treatments using lasers or intense pulsed light (IPL) are not classified as a regulated activity by the CQC

The Government commissioned a report from Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, the NHS Medical Director which was published in April 2013 and makes a number of recommendations aimed at regulation to safeguard members of the public. Interestingly in January 2013 the Royal College of Surgeons, prepared a report which  deals with a number of areas including qualifications, patient consent , advice, training etc. Let us hope that the Government actually make time to put into law safeguards to this area soon..

Do not have your operation on a Friday!

Latest research shows that patients who have surgery later in the week are more likely to die than those who have procedures earlier on. It probably confirms what many of us have thought is the case for some time. The BBC have a news story on the item here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22687599 

April Fool

Last year I wrote about the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill (LASPO) which, in part, was introduced to rid us of the ‘compensation culture’, a phase the press and Government love as a strap line.

On the 1^st April 2013 LASPO came into effect resulting in the abolition of Legal Aid for the vast majority of clinical negligence claims and No Win No Fee changed significantly such that the costs a negligent Defendant pays is now reduced with the injured victim losing some of their damages to meet the costs shortfall.

The Government is continuing in its’ gradual erosion of the civil justice system with the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 which prevents claims being brought by some employees injured at work. Jo Swinson MP, the business minister, said the proposals were part of the Government’s wider reforms to tackle ‘the perception of a compensation culture’.

My colleague, Simon Bransby a specialist personal injury lawyer, wrote to his local MP, Chloe Smith, questioning how her Government could legislate on the basis of ‘perception’ as surely legislation should be based on fact and evidence. Her response “I think it is fair to tackle a ‘perception’, because such perceptions can cause real actions”. Quite what this means I do not know.

So, what is the evidence and what are the facts? In 2012 Government figures show whiplash claims fell for the second year running by nearly 60,000 bringing them to the same levels as in 2008/2009.The insurance industry has lobbied the Government hard to legislate to try and extinguish claims promising if they did so that motor insurance premiums will come down by an average of 15% in the next year. I for one will not be holding my breath!

By Sara Westwood at sarawestwood@m-j-p.co.uk

Compensation Culture – Myth or reality?

The media loves us to hate the personal injury lawyers with emotive terms such as ‘fat cat lawyers’, ‘creaming money off the NHS’ and the real favourite ‘Britain’s Compensation Culture’ bandied about. There is, no doubt, a perception of a compensation culture but the figures show no real increase in claims other than those made after road traffic accidents.  Whilst more whiplash claims are being made the statistics have been skewed by the fraudsters who stage accidents often with a number of people in the car to ensure maximum compensation recovery. Clearly this needs to be stamped out and quickly. Oddly if a friend or relative tells us they were hit by another vehicle we are unsurprised, and perhaps expect, a claim is being made. When a friend or relative tells us they are making a claim against a doctor who has caused them injury the reaction is one of disapproval and unease. It was interesting to see the GMC report of complaints against doctors having risen 23%. They say this is not due to standards falling but patients being more prepared to complain than previously, and having higher expectations. I think this is almost certainly right and there is no reason why doctors, as in common with other professions, should not be brought to account when that is necessary and no reason why people should feel there is a stigma attached to complaining about a doctor or making a claim when they are injured. Contrary to popular belief proving negligence is difficult. We all make mistakes and doctors are no different. The law allows them to make mistakes without the fear of litigation. It is only when their treatment or surgery would not be supported by a reasonable body of doctors that a claim can possibly be made. Most lawyers specialising in clinical negligence work are committed to doing the best for their clients many of whom sadly have life changing injuries and, despite what the Daily Mail would like us to believe, they did so last year at a cost 7% lower than the previous year.

by Sara Westwood at sarawestwood@m-j-p.co.uk