Mesh victims ‘still fighting for justice' five years on from review
Sling the Mesh, a campaign group representing women harmed by mesh, accused governments of 'dragging their feet' on implementing all the recommendations set out in the report.
The review examined how the health service responded to concerns over pelvic mesh – which has been linked to crippling, life-changing complications including chronic pain, infections and loss of sex life; the anti-epilepsy drug sodium valproate – which has been linked to physical malformations, autism and developmental delay in many children when it is taken by their mothers during pregnancy, and hormone pregnancy tests such as Primodos – which are thought to be associated with birth defects and miscarriages.
It concluded that patients came to 'avoidable harm' because the healthcare system failed to respond in a speedy and appropriate way when serious concerns were raised about some medical treatments.
The First Do No Harm review, published in 2020, found patients were 'dismissed' and 'overlooked', while the healthcare system had a 'glacial' and 'defensive' response to concerns over treatments.
It set out a series of recommendations, but campaigners have said that to date, some three of the nine recommendations set out in the review have been implemented.
Sling the Mesh said that the Government had not done a retrospective audit to gauge the scale of the harm caused by mesh implants or provided compensation for women injured as a result.
It also said that ministers had not delivered on a recommendation to reform the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).f
Kath Sansom, founder of the Sling The Mesh campaign, said: 'It's not good enough. Five years ago, Baroness Cumberlege laid bare the systemic failures that caused irreparable harm to women across the UK.
'Yet here we are in 2025, and the Government has dragged its feet on the most critical reforms.
'Women are without compensation and still being failed by a healthcare system that was supposed to protect them.'
MP Sharon Hodgson, chairwoman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for First Do No Harm, said: 'To have this little progress five years on from the publication of the report is hugely disappointing.
'Five years ago today, things felt hopeful. The review marked what we thought would be the beginning of real systematic change, the start of building a system that listens to women when they report harm – an end to defensiveness and denial.
'Yet progress can only be seen in three out of the nine changes she proposed, with one still ongoing – leaving five completely untouched.
'Crucially, thousands of women and families who were irreversibly harmed through no fault of their own are yet to see compensation.
'Money will not make up for all they have endured. However, it would at the least remove the financial burden placed on their lives – helping them to navigate the physical, mental and financial impact these scandals have placed upon them and their families.
'Five years on, the time for excuses is over. We need action now and I call on my Government to implement all the recommendations, including updating the House on a timeline for compensation as soon as possible.'
Rebekah Smith, Epilepsy Action's chief executive, said: 'It is a scandal that as far back as 35 years, thousands of women with epilepsy weren't being told about the risks involved with taking valproate in pregnancy when evidence was mounting. These women have had to live with the reality of that for decades and the huge emotional and financial impact it has on their lives.
'It is also a scandal that two reports in the last five years have recommended that families be compensated for the ordeal and yet those affected are still waiting for the light at the end of the tunnel.'
Nicola Swanborough, head of external affairs at the Epilepsy Society, said: 'Five years after the publication of the Cumberlege Review, we welcome the fact that regulations have been tightened around the prescribing of valproate for women with epilepsy, reducing the risk of harm for the next generation.
'But for the families whose lives have been devastated by the side effects of valproate, there has still been no promise of the compensation that they have long campaigned for, and which was recommended by the Patient Safety Commissioner.'
One of the key recommendations of the report was the appointment of a Patient Safety Commissioner, who would be an 'independent public leader with a statutory responsibility'.
A commissioner was appointed, but following the Government's 10-year plan for health last week, it has been confirmed that this role will be transferred into the MHRA.
Ms Sansom said: 'Moving the Patient Safety Commissioner role to the MHRA silences the patient voice instead of strengthening it.
'It strips away independence, undermines trust, and betrays the very women this role was created to protect.'
Earlier this month, Health Secretary Wes Streeting said that patients do not need 'ventriloquists' from arm's length bodies to speak for them, and more weight should be given to the likes of MPs and councillors.
Streeting suggested the patient safety landscape is 'cluttered', with NHS leaders receiving 'competing and contradictory instructions' from different organisations.
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'The harm caused by pelvic mesh continues to be felt today. Our sympathies are with those affected and we are fully focused on how best to support patients and prevent future harm.
'This is a complex area of work and the Government is carefully considering the Patient Safety Commissioner's recommendations in full.
'Health Minister Baroness Gillian Merron met patients affected and has committed to providing a further update.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Doctors' strikes 'could last more than six months' as first NHS walkout ends
BStrike leaders from the British Medical Association staged a picket line at Health Secretary Wes Streeting's local hospital today amid renewed calls for pay talks Striking doctors have suggested walkouts could go on for more than six months if Wes Streeting does not make them an improved offer. Strike leaders staged a picket line at the Health Secretary's local hospital on the final day of a five-day strike. Resident doctors in the British Medical Association have voted to secure a legal mandate to strike until January 2026. The BMA's resident doctors committee co-chair Dr Ross Nieuwoudt was asked outside King George Hospital in Ilford, east London, whether strikes could go on after then into next year. He replied: "We are incredibly hopeful that Wes Streeting and the Government at large see sense and come to talk to us now so that doesn't even have to be a consideration. That would require a new ballot but we're hoping it doesn't have to get there at all. "All Wes Streeting needs to do is talk to us now; the door is open. That is the best-case scenario... for him to come and talk to us and resolve this dispute." The British Medical Association is holding out for a full return to 2008 levels of pay, arguing that by the Retail Price Index Measure of inflation their real terms salaries are down a fifth since then. Mr Streeting said last week that the BMA's resident doctors committee co-chairs had 'seriously underestimated me' after they ended last ditch talks to avert the strike. The Government has refused to budge on the headline pay rise of 5.4% - pointing out it is an above inflation deal for the second year running - but had been negotiating on other issues such as the cost of training. Speaking from the picket line no Tuesday, Dr Shivam Sharma, resident doctor in north London, said: 'We've had our pay cut by over a fifth but we don't see fewer patients, we don't do less work, in fact our work has become harder. What we're asking for is for a doctor who 's paid just over £18 an hour to be paid just over £22 an hour. 'We're not asking for this money in one go. We're asking for it over a number of years… So please Mr Streeting… do the right thing by everyone.' The BMA would not be drawn on whether and how quickly it will start planning more strikes. Its resident doctors committee co-chair Dr Melissa Ryan said: "There doesn't need to be a single day of strike action. Wes Streeting knows what he has to do. If he wants to resolve the dispute, he has to contact us and present a credible offer. "We do have a mandate that is going all the way into January but... it's a damn shame we have to do a single day of strike action and Mr Streeting can prevent that." NHS officials have pledged that cancelled bookings would be rescheduled within two weeks but warned of knock-on impacts for other patients. Dr Layla McCay, director of policy at NHS Confederation, said: "Resident doctors have recently had a very substantial increase in their pay and the Government has been pretty clear that at the moment, there isn't more money to be negotiated. Clearly the Government is quite keen to have those discussions about other non-pay factors, like workforce conditions. "I think that the hope of all healthcare leaders is that the BMA will get around the table with the Government and figure out a solution to this, because what absolutely nobody wants to see is any further cases of industrial action after this one." The BMA has also launched a "linked dispute" with the Government over a lack of places for doctors in training. The union said that this year there were more than 30,000 resident doctors applying for just 10,000 specialty training places. A poll by the union, conducted on 4,400 doctors over the last week, found that 52% of resident doctors completing their second year of training - when they enter specialty training - do not have substantive employment lined up from August. In a joint statement, co-chairs Dr Ross Nieuwoudt and Dr Melissa Ryan said: 'With more than six million patients on waiting lists in England, it's maddening that a third of resident doctors say they cannot get a job. Across the NHS, this means potentially thousands of UK doctors are left in employment limbo when patients desperately need their care. 'Commitments from the Government to address this don't go far enough or are too vague to convince us that they understand the gravity of the situation, so we're making clear that, alongside pay, we are entering a dispute and demanding action so that no UK-trained, capable, doctor is left underemployed in the NHS.'
Daily Mirror
17 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer told to delay DWP Universal Credit cuts for new claimants
The Work and Pensions Committee led by Labour MP Debbie Abrahams warns in a new report disabled people could still be pushed into poverty as a result of the watered-down reforms Keir Starmer must delay a cut to Universal Credit for new claimants, a new report by MPs warns today. The Work and Pensions Committee says disabled people could still be pushed into poverty as a result of the watered-down reforms. Earlier this month the PM U-turned on plans to restrict eligibility for a key disability benefit — Personal Independence Payments (PIP). But there will be changes to the health element of Universal Credit for new claimants. From April 2026 all existing and new claimants with severe or terminal conditions will be protected, the MPs said. But they added other claimants assessed as having limited capability for work and work-related activity will see their awards halved — from £423.27 to £217.26 a month. While welcoming the major U-turn on PIP last month, the MPs' report said: "We remain critical, however, of the Government's failure to properly assess the impact of the cut to UC health on poverty, health and labour force participation. "For this reason, we urge it to delay the measure until it has had time to make such an assessment." Committee Chair Debbie Abrahams said: 'We welcome the concessions that the Government made to the UC and PIP Bill (now the UC Bill). But there are still issues with these welfare reforms not least with the cut in financial support that newly sick and disabled people will receive.' She added: "The Government's own analysis published in March indicates that from next April approximately 50,000 people who develop a health condition or become disabled – and those who live with them - will enter poverty by 2030 as a result of the reduction in support of the UC health premium.' 'We recommend delaying the cuts to the UC-health premium, especially given that other policies such as additional NHS capacity, or employment support, or changes in the labour market to support people to stay in work, have yet to materialise.' 'We agree in a reformed and sustainable welfare system, but we must ensure that the wellbeing of those who come into contact with it is protected. The lesson learned from last month should be that the impact of policy changes to health-related benefits must be assessed prior to policy changes being implemented to avoid potential risks to claimants.' Responding to the report, Nil Guzelgun from charity Mind, said: 'We cannot build a fair and compassionate system by stripping away support from those who need it most. Real reform must start with listening, both to the evidence and to disabled people themselves. "We urge the Government to pause these damaging plans and commit instead to a benefits system that protects people's health, dignity and independence.'
Daily Record
a day ago
- Daily Record
Stark warning issued by Renfrewshire hospices facing staffing catastrophe
Accord and St Vincent's hospices have confirmed they face a retention crisis if Scottish Government ministers fail to fund staff wage increases in line with the NHS. Renfrewshire hospices have warned they face a staffing catastrophe unless the Scottish Government meets an earlier commitment around wages. Accord and St Vincent's hospices have confirmed they face a retention crisis if ministers fail to fund staff wage increases in line with the NHS. The government had, in its 2025 budget, committed £5 million for hospices and alignment of pay uplifts to NHS pay awards. But the 4.25 per cent awarded to NHS staff means the hospices will need a collective £8.6m to offer their nurses, doctors and other health professionals the same pay. The hospices say they fear they will lose their staff if they cannot afford to meet the salaries provided in the public sector. For most of the lifeline services – who provide palliative care for people in inpatient units and at their homes – the wage bill accounts for 70 per cent of their overall costs. For Accord alone, it is due to receive £175,000 of the pledged £5m but, crucially, needs an additional £150,000 to meet the required wage increases in the 2025/26 financial year. Jacki Smart, CEO of Accord and chair of the Scottish Hospice Leadership Group – which represents hospices across the country – reiterated calls for a more sustainable funding model. She said: 'The Scottish Government must urgently release both the monies earmarked and commit the funds needed to help hospices keep pace with the latest NHS pay award. 'Our staff are talented and dedicated professionals and it isn't right that they are priced out of working in hospices because of NHS pay awards decided by the Scottish Government. 'Hospices are the backbone of specialist palliative care in Scotland with around 2,000 staff caring for over 23,000 patients and family members each year. No hospice leader wants to face the choice between cutting staff or curtailing pay but that is the stark reality now. 'Without being able to keep pace with NHS pay, the practical impact is that the crisis in Scottish hospices continues, while patients and staff lose out.' She added: 'The public are generous in their support but the Scottish Government needs to ensure hospices are on a level playing field with the NHS, to retain staff and continue to deliver high quality care and support.' A spokesperson for the Scottish Government said: 'We recognise the pressures hospices are facing and we greatly value the essential palliative care services delivered by hard-working staff. 'That is why we have already committed this year to supporting hospices to provide pay parity with NHS levels. 'We will continue to engage closely with the Scottish Hospice Leadership Group to understand what more can be done to support palliative care services in Scotland. 'It remains the responsibility of integration joint boards (IJBs) to commission palliative care services, including independent hospices, to meet the needs of their local communities. 'As such, we expect Scottish hospices and IJBs to continue to engage on any matters that may impact on the delivery of local palliative care services.' On average, two thirds of hospice income is raised through fundraising. The remaining statutory funding is from government that is primarily allocated and distributed through local health and social care partnerships. For St Vincent's Hospice in Howwood, it means the team needs to raise £1.5m a year to keep it up and running, while it costs Paisley-based Accord £7,700 a day.
