NHS negligence?

Question

If someone was given an initial diagnosis of a not too serious inflamatory disease, and then a few weeks later told it was in fact cancer. Only to be told a week after that, that it was in fact an inflamatory disease, but not as orginaly diagnosed.

Would this be considered to be negligence on the part of the NHS?

The cancer diagnosis was given after a biopsy. It was deemed to be Sarcoma.

Fozbah. Rest assured there is not a monitary gain interest here. The point is that there have been cases where people have commited suicide on recieving such tragic news. In this case, a diagnosis that was wrong. Should this person persue sueing the NHS, then any money given in compensation will be given to charity. There is a principle here, and no matter how well the Dr's in question dealt with the case is unimportant, the patient should not have been informed that they had a disease like sarcoma, when in fact they did not.
Being told they do not have cancer a few weeks afterwards, does not in anyway compensate for the emotional pain, worry and suffering, the patient and their family had to endure before and during the period running upto the final diagnosis.

Answer 1

Definitely - being told you have a cancer has a catastrophic effect on the individual. For this reason a patient should only be told they have a cancer if there is certainty. The results of various tests will all be used to cross reference the diagnosis. Ultimately a biopsy is the most precise test. Many patients are told little/nothing during the investigations and this is the only professional way to handle the situation so as not to cause excessive worry.... unfortunately this often translates as...."the doctor is telling me nothing" or "they are hiding secrets".

Whats happened there is out of order and lacks professionalism.

Answer 2

I have read all the points and they are varied and interesting. From my point of view, I would be pleased that the second diagnosis of cancer was in fact wrong and concentrate on still having a life, albeit with an inflammatory disease. This is not a case of negligence, as from what you say, no further action was taken following the cancer diagnosis. If, for instance, radiotherapy or chemotherapy treatment had been commenced, and it then evolved that there was no cancer, a negligent claim could be made. However, this is not the case. I believe that the UK is rapidly cultivating its own blame culture as per the USA. I don't deny that it would mentally destroy someone to be told that they have cancer, but surely this would be countered by being told that in fact they do not have cancer. Unless, of course, the real story here is not of an individuals' health, but of their bank balance?

Answer 3

I would never wish to defend sloppy work, but I would have to say to look at a case like this would take meticulous scrutiny of all the facts before an answer is given. Medicine and the diagnostic process is incredibly complex. Even the most expert diagnosticians with make a wrong diagnosis a significant percentage of the time.

If based on available facts and a logical, judgement, getting it wrong is probably more often than not defensible.

Because of this countries like New Zealand have brought in a No-fault compensation system. Unfortunately this has been a disaster because 10-15 % of all medical decisions are wrong and the NZ Government has tied itself up in legal and financial knots with the help of the no-win-no-fee lawyers!

Answer 4

Damn right!! This is a typical case of negligence - go down the line of complaining to the NHS patient liaison first. Then find a solicitor that has a free surgery and see what can be done legally for mental stress etc.

Answer 5

Many hospitals have a Patient Liaison & Advise Service (PALS) - they might be of some help. The person could try the hospital in question's PALS service for advice or support.

My local hospital PALS service summarises their services as:

'Listening and providing information and support - on healthcare issues and NHS services.

Negotiating a quick resolution to problems.

Liaising with staff and other organisations.

Providing support and advocacy for more complex issues.'


Hope this is helpful.

Answer 6

I'm uncertain about the word 'negligence,' but I'm lost to finding a replacement at present.

Personally, I've been told be a Professor that I need cardiac surgery 'Within Six Months,' and have been referred back to the other guy. Having spoken with the secretary of the 'other guy' today, she was surprised to hear of this and of the fact it has taken the Prof 2 weeks (to date) to write about this.

I'm wondering as to whether this could be classed as 'negligence' too now!!

Sash.

Answer 7

No, diagnoses of an ailment is frequently difficult, so I would hazard a guess that whilst it is not negligence per se it possibly is incompetance, a slightly different and hard to ascertain situation. Hopefully it is the later and not cancer.

Answer 8

Yes, but it can be hard to prove. You can get advice from your local Community Health Council. They monitor complaints against Health Trusts.

Answer 9

at the very least i would make a complaint to the Medical association for gross sloppyness and general incompetence and get somebody else to handle it from scratch

Answer 10

If you feel this way then why don't you inform your self on weather it is or not negligence first before you do anything that you might regret.