Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

113 Medical Negligence Cases To Cost the State €1.4 Billion

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,230 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    The sad thing is, there's an entire board (PIAB mentioned above) set up to apparently independently assess the financial need of "victims" in these cases.

    The only sensible conclusion is that they're on commission or something.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,367 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Grayson wrote: »
    Have you gone through the cases that caused all the expense and actually come to that conclusion? Because if not, you're just someone with no evidence and an axe to grind. You'll actually pick the worse cases, the cases that the state paid the most on and say that there's a problem with the legal profession rather than with what caused those people to make a claim in the first place. The fact that you focused on the legal fees and even referenced the girl on the Luas shows that you don't give a damn about the people who had to make malpractice claims.





    It's not always court cases. Some are infront of the medical review panel (I can't remember what it's called).

    All you have to do to be hired as a doctor is be a doctor. It doesn't mean they're all good. Most are and the Irish Medical Council take the bad ones seriously. It's the reason that they have these reviews and can remove a license to practice. Unfortunately they have to make a mistake for it to get that far.

    It's not always bad doctors though. There's bad practice by good doctors. In the HIQA investigation into Savita's death they found over 20 points of failure. Some of those were just bad procedures that the staff followed. What made it worse was that the same situation had happened a few years beforehand in another hospital. The HSE brought in changes to prevent it happening again....in that hospital. They never implementation the changes elsewhere.

    Then there's the state of the HSE. It's relatively good overall but there's a severe lack of funding in certain areas. A&E is the most obvious. Lack of staff & beds cause accidents.

    Do you think it is reasonable for, for example an award given to a child, disabled through medical negligence at birth, to have up to one third of their award settlement retained by their legal team?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    kneem os wrote: »
    You hear about the odd case and think we'll sometimes mistakes get made. Never imagined there could be thousands of cases in the pipeline.

    You need to watch the news. Nearly every day now. A baby died as they "omitted" to connect the oxygen monitor during surgery. Another baby was left with half a dressing pack in his throat and nearly died weeks later.

    A disabled man was blinded when they removed his shunt when it became infected and "omitted" to replace it.. It had been removing fluid when then built up and destroyed the optic nerve.

    A man died as a local GP said the x ray was clear of pneumonia... died of pneumonia the day after.

    The list is endless


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Do you think it is reasonable for, for example an award given to a child, disabled through medical negligence at birth, to have up to one third of their award settlement retained by their legal team?

    Good legal care which is needed in medical cases, costs. A good barrister can ask E1000 an hour.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    sdanseo wrote: »
    The sad thing is, there's an entire board (PIAB mentioned above) set up to apparently independently assess the financial need of "victims" in these cases.

    The only sensible conclusion is that they're on commission or something.


    Not sure what you mean?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    I'm going through a very difficult health journey at the moment which on the outside looking in is major malpractice and negligence on several sides however from my point of view I'd rather keep my foot/leg/ability to walk than sue the ****e out of ignorant blaise doctors and a ****e health system.

    What use is money if it costs you you're quality of life due to the system not willing or being able to listen to you, sometimes I think throwing money at these cases makes the wheel keep turning but when you are faced with a life altering situation that has to be done by the books then you are ****ed as it's their way or no way.

    Much the same situation for me here. BUT you would be amazed the difference a challenge from a good barrister can achieve. The system can be made to listen to you. Often no need to sue. If there is a need then fine. You can buy better treatment then.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,601 ✭✭✭Nermal


    How come every successful negligence claim is not accompanied by a prosecution of a medical professional?

    If someone was negligent, why don't they face criminal consequences?

    If they weren't negligent to a criminal extent, why then is the State liable for anything?


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,059 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Noveight wrote: »
    To pay out half a million to a woman who admitted liability was significant.

    It almost says "we were at fault for not protecting you from yourself."


    She was a child when it happened.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,059 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Do you think it is reasonable for, for example an award given to a child, disabled through medical negligence at birth, to have up to one third of their award settlement retained by their legal team?


    Do you think legal people should work on cases for years for nothing?


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,066 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Do you think it is reasonable for, for example an award given to a child, disabled through medical negligence at birth, to have up to one third of their award settlement retained by their legal team?

    Like Graces said, if that's what they charge, then yes it is. Some lawyers work on contingency and wouldn't take a risky case otherwise. Some work on hourly billing. IF the family have to pay that to get justice then it's worth it. It's not the law that says a lawyer has to get 1/3 of the payment. The fees are paid in each case.
    You can even have cases like Katie Hopkins where someone ends up losing and going bankrupt over their legal fees.

    It seems that you're angry that people who want justice after a doctor has committed malpractice hire the best lawyers to try the case.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,066 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Nermal wrote: »
    How come every successful negligence claim is not accompanied by a prosecution of a medical professional?

    If someone was negligent, why don't they face criminal consequences?

    If they weren't negligent to a criminal extent, why then is the State liable for anything?

    It's not always a criminal matter. And the burden of proof is different in civil cases. Take libel for example. You can sue someone for it but do you ever see people go to jail for it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Grayson wrote: »
    Like Graces said, if that's what they charge, then yes it is. Some lawyers work on contingency and wouldn't take a risky case otherwise. Some work on hourly billing. IF the family have to pay that to get justice then it's worth it. It's not the law that says a lawyer has to get 1/3 of the payment. The fees are paid in each case.
    You can even have cases like Katie Hopkins where someone ends up losing and going bankrupt over their legal fees.

    It seems that you're angry that people who want justice after a doctor has committed malpractice hire the best lawyers to try the case.[/QUOTE[

    And remember that the state eg HSE will employ top legal professionals to defend themselves..


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Nermal wrote: »
    How come every successful negligence claim is not accompanied by a prosecution of a medical professional?

    If someone was negligent, why don't they face criminal consequences?

    If they weren't negligent to a criminal extent, why then is the State liable for anything?

    Negligence is not a criminal act. Not like assault etc. If as in one terrible baby death

    https://www.rte.ie/news/connacht/2018/1025/1006627-baby-inquest/

    There was no criminal intention. but culpable negligence

    And this tragic case

    https://www.thejournal.ie/parents-of-baby-who-died-from-a-cold-sore-call-for-greater-awareness-and-policy-change-4315096-Oct2018/

    The verdict of "healthcare acquired infection"

    In this case no legal action v HSE for compensation?


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Nermal wrote: »
    How come every successful negligence claim is not accompanied by a prosecution of a medical professional?

    If someone was negligent, why don't they face criminal consequences?

    If they weren't negligent to a criminal extent, why then is the State liable for anything?

    The disciplining should come from within HSE and the Medical Council. ie sanctions , barring.

    No idea how many/few of the doctors in these cases do get struck off?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,601 ✭✭✭Nermal


    Graces7 wrote: »
    Negligence is not a criminal act. Not like assault etc. If as in one terrible baby death

    https://www.rte.ie/news/connacht/2018/1025/1006627-baby-inquest/

    There was no criminal intention. but culpable negligence

    From the article: "during the procedure, a critical drop in oxygen levels went undetected, with fatal consequences".

    There are two possible scenarios:

    A drop in oxygen levels can and does go undetected because of reasons outside of the control of the professionals involved, e.g. oxygen levels are not routinely checked as part of the procedure, or they are only checked at certain intervals, or if a certain symptom manifests. In this case, the State is not liable - procedures were followed. No procedure is infallible.

    or

    A drop in oxygen levels went undetected because the professionals involved did not follow procedure, e.g. they didn't perform a test that they should have, or didn't interpret a test correctly. In this case, if we decide the State is liable, why are the professionals involved not fired?

    There appears to be a 'grey area' where the State is on the hook for multi-million euro payouts, and the professionals involved are not held accountable. That's not acceptable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,230 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    Graces7 wrote: »
    [/B]

    Not sure what you mean?

    Tongue-in cheek implying that the PIAB are incentivised to award higher payouts by getting a cut or kickback from the law companies.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    sdanseo wrote: »
    Tongue-in cheek implying that the PIAB are incentivised to award higher payouts by getting a cut or kickback from the law companies.

    But they are working? Not for free! Such is life.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Nermal wrote: »
    From the article: "during the procedure, a critical drop in oxygen levels went undetected, with fatal consequences".


    There appears to be a 'grey area' where the State is on the hook for multi-million euro payouts, and the professionals involved are not held accountable. That's not acceptable.

    excellent question. If you have ever tried to make a formal complaint re a dr or a hospital you will know it is like spitting in the wind. GMC is a joke.

    In truth the only way forward no matter how serious the negligence, is to take legal action.

    Have a look at the "Rate my Hospital" site.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,367 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Grayson wrote: »
    Like Graces said, if that's what they charge, then yes it is. Some lawyers work on contingency and wouldn't take a risky case otherwise. Some work on hourly billing. IF the family have to pay that to get justice then it's worth it. It's not the law that says a lawyer has to get 1/3 of the payment. The fees are paid in each case.
    You can even have cases like Katie Hopkins where someone ends up losing and going bankrupt over their legal fees.

    It seems that you're angry that people who want justice after a doctor has committed malpractice hire the best lawyers to try the case.

    No I am angry that taxpayer pay for the incompetence of one guilded self regulating group and the greed of another.

    We have the highest compensation payouts in the world and the highest legal fees.
    Surely that can’t be solely because we have the best legal teams in the world or is the system gamed to their advantage.

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/health/legal-costs-in-ireland-are-now-highest-in-western-world-1.2053218%3fmode=amp

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7




  • Advertisement
Advertisement