- Brian Capstick, senior partner (jbc@capsticks.co.uk)1
- 1Capsticks Solicitors, London SW15 2TT
- Accepted 8 January 2004
The UK's proposed reforms of claims for clinical injury risk fuelling a compensation culture
About 7500 clinical negligence claims are brought each year in England.1 The current system has been criticised by some as complex, inequitable, and expensive in terms of time and legal fee. However, the cost of negligence claims in 2001-2 was £446m,2 less than 1% of the budget for the NHS. Last year, the chief medical officer published a consultation document, Making Amends, which set out proposals for a NHS redress scheme that would provide adjudication for certain clinical negligence claims without the need for legal proceedings.2 It draws on experience in the United States, New Zealand, France, and Scandinavia, which have similar problems. So how will the proposals work, and what will they mean for the NHS?
What is the redress scheme?
The proposed NHS redress scheme will provide an administrative rather than a judicial route for claims up to £30 000 (€43 640, $54 420) and claims arising from severe neurological impairment related to birth (box). Initially, these schemes would apply only to the hospital sector but would eventually be extended to primary care.
The redress scheme proposes that hospitals investigate all adverse events, not only in response to a complaint or claim by the patient. Making Amends predicts about 850 000 adverse events a year, many more than the 33 000 complaints concerning hospital care or the 6797 new clinical claims reported to the NHS Litigation Authority in 2002-3. Although prompt investigation of adverse events that lead to serious injury is a sound risk management measure,3 investigating the larger number of adverse events that cause only minor harm will greatly increase the workload.

Reforms could result in more cases of medical negligence coming to court
Credit: MEPL
Proposals for NHS redress scheme2
To provide investigations and remedial treatment when …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: How much of a social media profile can doctors have?
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Is it unethical for doctors to encourage healthy adults to donate a kidney to a stranger? No
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Report predicts 20 million AIDS orphans in Africa by 2010
Published 13 February 2012
Re: On the impossibility of being expert
Published 13 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012