AIBU to think this maternity negligence payout seems disproportionately high

[Sheldonsheher]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9363yynkkdo

Although sad this maternity case award seems really high. Most children with these needs do not get millions to live. Would it not be better to spread such compensation money more fairly over lots of people than give to a small minority who can successfully litigate negligence?

What is it specifically you think is disproportionate about the amount paid here OP?

There's certainly room to talk about the pros and cons of a more adversarial v no fault system, and the way in which NHS Trusts are incentivised to deny at every step of the process racks up higher legal costs. But you're not being very clear about what you want here, because you also appear to think some of the money for this severely disabled child's care needs ought to be redistributed to people who have weaker cases, and in most instances will have lower needs. That's bizarre.

I think there are two separate elements to this:

That money is an appropriate amount IMO for the errors made and the result.

But I do also think it can be hard to reconcile with the many people who have children with similar or even worse additional needs who are struggling to keep their heads above water financially.

If it costs this much to provide appropriate care then what about all the other children who have similar conditions but don’t have £28m?

So my issue isn’t about the money these parents got, they absolutely deserve it and errors of this magnitude need to be properly accounted for, but I think it does shine a light on how desperately unfair life is for so many people who are also in this situation through not fault of their own, there’s just no way to claim money from the vagaries of nature.

I’m not bitter bit rude that’s not the point. It just struck me it was not the best system.
also medical negligence is not a straightforward issue and as usual the lawyers probably get a healthy cut.

The lawyers will get a healthy cut because this process takes several years.

I studied a chapter on the value of life in a recent OU economics degree. Families broadly stay economically static. So the children of doctors will likely become doctors and children of cleaners will likely work in the low paid service sector. That isn't to say there aren't anomalies. But the "economic value" of a person does differ based on their families circumstances where there is nothing else to go off.

In adult insurance claims the amount paid out varies based on actual earnings.

I completely agree with you that it does feel unfair to families in this situation by chance. At the same time I can also see if, through negligence, this was done to your child,you absolutely should be compensated. Honestly we need much better services so that families wouldn't be in a better position by taking nhs trust to court and winning but that's unlikely to ever happen.

This amount will have been calculated to provide 24 hour care to her for life and to compensate for a lifetime loss of earnings. Additionally there will be compensation to the parents for the mistakes made, but the bulk of it will be lifetime care costs which would not have been needed had the hospital not made mistakes

YABU.

The child is permanently disabled through negligence.

Interestingly, the NZ system still allows for people to sue for exemplary damages if they want to. It's discussed in this article, along with lots of other relevant stuff

https://jhmhp.amegroups.org/article/view/9767/html

The numbers of successful claims are pretty low OP, which is seen as one of the problems with the system.

This is inherently not right in my opinion and a kind of old fashioned view. Yes adult insurance you insure your earnings obviously. Totally different to predicting the worth missed life opportunities of a baby.

Have you ever met a family with a child whose injuries are like this girl’s? This is a lifelong impact on the whole family due to the hospital’s negligence

the worst thing of all is quite often lessons are not learnt from one tragedy and the reason the nhs negligence bill is so high is that things like this keep happening

Funding is obviously part of the issue but also leadership (or lack of). Look at the various reports about maternity care problems around the country

claims like this are accessible to all if the need is there and that money funds carers, therapies, and all the stuff that the girl and her family will need for her whole lifetime

don’t just believe the gutter press commentary on things like this

If you have a clear cut and dry case a lot of lawyers will take it on a no win no fee basis.

Which is fine, but changing this would require root and branch reform rather than just deciding those principles shouldn't apply in this one area whilst they still persist elsewhere. As we have insurance and legal systems that broadly allow for earnings to be taken into account, it's not equitable to decide the NHS get to opt out of that when they've fucked up so badly a child is disabled for life.

Yes also this is not the gutter press I think more like the BMA and other professional organisations have suggested reform.

Yes this is what my friend has got. They are spending years working on the case and will only get paid if they win.

I agree it’s a ridiculous amount of money, the NHS is on its knees yet it has to fund compo claims itself. So that money could be used to improve services, but instead that is a new hole in the budget

But why? A family of doctors will be disproportionately affected (financially) than a family of say cleaners as discussed in another post, compensation is handled case by case.

This isn't the type of thing that brings the NHS to its knees, though. I'd rather this money be going to this child, who did nothing wrong to anyone, than management in a archaic machine of incompetence.

Anyone defending a corporation over a child has some weird values, IMO.

By adult insurance I mean things like car insurance claims. If you are in a car accident, a doctor will receive a higher personal injury payout than a cleaner.

I think it has insurance for this doesn’t it? Although I know the insurance itself will cost. Considering the shit state of maternity care in this country in not surprised we need to ability to pay out like this, but appreciate it could be a bit chicken and egg!

For those who haven't read the article:

"the trust must pay a lump sum of £8m, followed by an annual sum of £225,000 for 10 years, with further annual payments of £335,000 after that."

The family haven't 'got' £28 million. The BBC headline is misleading people.

The BBC headline is misleading people.

I, for one, am shocked. I thought so much better of the BBC 😝

I’m not defending a corporation - I’m saying it’s not fit for purpose but having to pay compo claims isn’t going to help.

I agree about management etc, fwiw. I would rather money go into providing services for all.

But you don't have to pay them if you're not negligent. The lesson should be: don't be negligent.

And negligence is more likely to happen in a system that isn’t fit for purpose.