Partner Article

Patients turning detective to sue medical staff who do not outline risks, negligence lawyer warns

DISSATISFIED hospital patients who feel their trust has been betrayed by medical staff who fail to outline the risks of invasive procedures are turning detective to take legal redress, a medical negligence lawyer warns.

Internet research by aggrieved patients is creating a rise in legal cases against doctors and surgeons failing to involve them under ‘informed consent’ guidelines laid down by the General Medical Council (GMC), says Kim Daniells, a partner at Clinical Negligence and Catastrophic Injury (CNCI), a specialist division of Harrowells Solicitors, York.

Kim Daniells, part of a ten-strong team advising patients on medical negligence cases nationally, says that rising concern over incomplete disclosure of the risks of some operations means it is now a factor in more than half the cases they are pursuing against doctors and consultants.

UK healthcare managers have encouraged doctors and surgeons to involve patients in decisions about their treatment based on a balanced discussion on the benefits and risks. The GMC published a document “Consent – patients and doctors making decisions together” in 2008 to support the practice.

Kim Daniells says: “Patients are better informed than ever before and make their own enquiries about proposed investigations or treatment. Crucially, when problems occur, there is a wealth of information on the Internet to help them find out how and why problems may have occurred.

“The number of claims based upon lack of informed consent is increasing rapidly. Patients want to understand the relative risks of intervention rather than simply following the recommendations of their doctor. If they believe errors may have been made and they have not been made fully aware of the risks, they are quick to turn to the Internet to find out what was not made clear.”

A snap CNCI poll reveals that allegations of lack of informed consent has been raised by patients seeking compensation in more than half of their recent new enquiries. Of these, one has recently been settled by negotiation with the defendants and another is the subject of court proceedings. Enquiries in the other cases are ongoing.

Recent lack of consent issues raised by CNCI clients include: failing to advise a patient of the risk of bowel perforation associated with colonoscopy and failing to take into account the wishes of a woman in labour who did not want a forceps delivery and requested a caesarean section.

Kim Daniells adds: “It is understandable that clinicians who can diagnose and treat serious and life-threatening conditions, want to use their skills to benefit their patients. However, with a better-educated society, it is equally understandable that patients who are being offered invasive and risky procedures want a chance to weigh up the risks and consider their options.

“It is crucial to a good patient and doctor relationship that adequate time is spent explaining options, procedures and their risks. Patients who feel their trust has been betrayed are increasingly keen to raise their concerns. Where those clinicians have failed to listen to and take account of the patient’s wishes the consequences can be significant.”

CNCI is a specialist division of Harrowells Solicitors, York, launched in 2011 which supports victims of catastrophic injury or clinical negligence throughout England and Wales and recovered more than £11 million in damages for victims of very serious injuries in 2013.

Ends

This was posted in Bdaily's Members' News section by Mike Clarke .