|
|
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
WHY ADMIT THE TRUTH WHEN A COVER- UP WILL DO? NHS Complaints Procedure Self Help links included. The government would like us to accept that we live in a society where the NHS is the envy of the world but the truth is far darker. Patients typically have no medical training and thus possess no knowledge of medical science. Our traditions and cultures have taught us to trust in doctors without question. This leads to a paternal relationship where the patient is given information that they automatically accept. Patients' rights have not, therefore, evolved in practice. Our government has set forth the Patients' charter and many other directives, which, in practice, go unheeded in the workplace. Our judges have set precedents yet even our law is biased towards the doctor. It is said that we are becoming a litigious nation "like America" but there is nothing wrong with compensation when a "wrong" has been committed. Due to this perception the NHS has developed the new "no blame" culture where complaints procedures are unlikely to discover the truth. Professor Burns, a Complaints Convenor, is noted as saying "The purpose of an independent review us not to apportion blame to any individual or group of individuals. The independent Review panel process is not an appropriate mechanism for the truth". The main aim of NHS complaints procedures is to prevent litigation in any way or form. This is done by drowning them in a bureaucratic system where no answers can be obtained, severe delays in replying to correspondence are common, failure to disclose all medical records is a regular event and so forth. If we take a patient or relative who is already distressed, bereaved or ill and compound the issue with the factors mentioned, very few will show the desire to survive the complaints procedure let alone litigation. In addition, the lack of answers, the lack of any element of truth leads us to conclude there is no justice or truth in a system which is designed to fail the patient whether they are right or wrong. Complaints procedures are thus a breach of Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 since very few obtain a fair trial for any of their cases. From the legal perspective, it is well established that there is a symbiotic overall respect for doctors by the legal profession. Cases such as Bland and Bolam elucidate this fact. Negligence is such a precarious test that patients who are provided biased experts are bound to fail. Connected with all this are, of course, the experts who are doctors that can make or break the case. 90% of cases fail in medical negligence. There is no such thing as an independent opinion given each specialist will be reluctant to criticise another. E.g. If Great Ormond Street committed a crime; there would be no specialist to stand to protect the patient's rights. Loyalty in the medical profession is paramount and this invades the complaints process and litigation process to the extent that patient rights are in reality very limited. Patients are at a disadvantage in that they do not know the language used in medicine. It is therefore easy for the specialist to mislead them, as is often the case. We have known doctors to mislead people on many issues and the patient will not question. Why would he? After all the doctors does say " trust me I am a doctor". The above summary thus shows that in reality there are limited patients rights. This has been the case for many years due to a paternalistic attitude of doctors. The patient despairs at their lack of knowledge, their only weapon in a fight against a system that is Goliath to their David. Human rights need to be maintained and the patient has to be protected from harm at all times. This can only be done when patients and doctors fight for their rights. Most are lethargic and accept what is handed down to them. The majority will give up the fight due to the harsh environment one is thrown into. Few people survive, sacrificing everything for the sake of the truth. These few are listed here N.H.S Complaints Procedure, Confidence Tricksters Or What? Scarborough Hospital and BUPA Belvedere Hospital Scarborough both in North Yorkshire Ms Salsbury VS Eastbourne Hospital Doctors' Right to Lie : PDF file detailing the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of William and Anita POWELL against the United Kingdom SELF HELP INFORMATION These are the Department of Health's National Statistics Details of the Complaints Procedure Stages of the complaints procedure National Institute for Clinical Excellence OTHER ARTICLES OF INTEREST Better Complaints Procedures would reduce medical negligence Department of Health's Answer to the problems Patients let down by NHS complaints system Complaints against doctors up by a third Campaign for Medical Accountability Complaints against doctors expected to hit new record Milburn pledges to settle compensation claims more quickly Fixed payouts for NHS blunders
|
|
|
|
|
[Home] [NHS Exposed] [Patients] [Health Workers] [NHS in Crisis] [Legal Issues] [Media] [Helpdesk] [Public Views] All copyright remains with original authors unless otherwise stated. |
