Please tell my why I shouldn't start legal action

[piddie]

DS (2yrs at the time) was very ill last year and we believe a failure to give treatment from the GP led to him having long lasting effects that could have been avoided if appropriate care had been given when the GP first saw him. The warning signs were all there when the GP saw him. Instead he was sent home with no treatment, but later that same night ended up in intensive care and was lucky not to die. He now has some physical disability as a result of how severe his condition became, though the long term impact of this is still not clear. His problem will not go away but may deteriorate in time.

I have very mixed feelings about starting legal action here for compensation for him. The pros for him are obvious but please talk to me more about reasons why I shouldn't do this too. I need to get it clear in my head that I am being reasonable here I guess.

[WhoWhatWhereWhen]

I'm sorry I can think of a single reason why you shouldn't start legal action for compensation on behalf of your DS, you should also make a complaint about the GP

[bakingaddict]

If you really believe that your son's health has been permanently damaged by negliegent medical care then you should talk to a solicitor. They will assess whether there is a case to answer re your GP's actions

If a solicitor accepts your case then your probably in for the long haul and any payout will be put in a trust till your son reaches 18. It's whether you have the stomach for it all. People may say that you shouldn't sue because it takes money out of the NHS and that everybody can make mistakes, but unfortunately all too often it's only when there is a hefty financial penalty i.e lawsuit that bad practices are changed in the NHS and the light shone on shoddy practices