Man says wife ‘needlessly suffered' as hospital admits patient care failings
The husband of a retired hairdresser who died after a hospital procedure said she 'needlessly suffered,' as a report showed other patients also had problems with their care.
A review at Rotherham Hospital studied 68 cases from 2016 to 2021 where patients died or had problems within 30 days of an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), a procedure used to find and treat liver and gallbladder issues.
Failures were found in the care of 58 patients, while 25 'suffered some degree of harm', the review said.
Rotherham Hospital NHS Foundation Trust apologised, admitting that the care many patients received was not good enough.
Val Burkill, 73, of Bolton-upon-Dearne in South Yorkshire, had a gallstone procedure at Rotherham Hospital in October 2020 and was sent home soon after, but soon felt sharp pain and was taken back.
Doctors found a tear in her bowel, which led to sepsis and despite treatment, her health got worse and she died weeks later.
Law firm Irwin Mitchell, on the family's behalf, said the Trust admitted failings in the consent process for Mrs Burkill's ERCP and that she was prematurely discharged from hospital.
Her husband, Garry, 79, a retired builder, said: 'Seeing her as her life slipped away is something that will stay with us forever. We still had so many years together and I feel robbed that these were taken away from us.
'It breaks my heart to think how she needlessly suffered and the treatment she received from Rotherham Trust.
'Our family will never be the same without Val. We knew we owed it to her to get answers regarding her care but it was still devastating when the Trust admitted Val would have made a full recovery if she had received the correct care.'
Mr Burkill continued: 'This latest news is hard to accept. We knew there were issues with Val's care, but we never expected there to have been failings in the ERCP service on such a large scale.
'Not only has this news shocked us but it has brought back the horrible memories around what happened to Val and the pain and suffering she had to go through in her final weeks.
'It's hard not to think that if she had gone to another hospital for her ERCP, Val would still be alive.'
ERCP is a specialist procedure combining X-rays and endoscopy to diagnose and treat problems in the liver, gallbladder, bile ducts and pancreas.
The review found poor record-keeping, failures in obtaining proper informed consent, sedation problems and delays in care.
The Trust said it paused the service in 2021 after concerns about patient safety and care quality and that it has reviewed cases, contacted affected patients and pledged to improve standards moving forward.
Dr Jo Beahan, medical director of the Trust said: 'We apologise unreservedly to patients and their families affected by the failures identified in the ERCP service review.
'The care provided to some of the patients who underwent the procedure was not at the level that we strive for.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Fat jabs are changing the world. It's time to embrace them
At a recent business conference in London (Chatham House rules apply, so I have to keep it vague), an executive from a major American clothes retailer dropped this extraordinary statistic: the average item of women's clothing sold by her company in the US has gone down by a size in the past year. Just one year! The nation that practically invented obesity, and then exported it around the world, is now shrinking so fast that clothing companies can't keep up. Retailers which based their manufacturing orders on 2024 sizes stand to lose millions in unsold stock. I used to think the idea of solving the obesity crisis through drugs was borderline dystopian. It's the modern food system that has made us fat, after all: the sheer abundance of cheap, sugary, mass-produced junk that has flooded the consumer landscape, and which our hungry caveman appetites are predisposed to crave. Shouldn't we be trying to fix the broken system, rather than medicalising its victims? For decades, politicians and food companies have prevaricated, mumbling about personal responsibility and the importance of willpower, while a tidal wave of sickness rolled in. Diet-related disease now costs the UK around £98 billion a year – almost twice the current defence budget – in NHS treatments, lost productivity and welfare costs. Appetite-suppressing drugs seemed, at first, like an admission of defeat: we can't work out how to improve the food system, so you'll just have to inject your way out of it. But now it seems the drugs themselves might be about to fix the system, from the bottom up. Within the space of four years, a fifth of American adults have been prescribed GLP-1 medications. (In the UK, the figure is around one in ten, although we are catching up fast.) This is a long way off market saturation, given that three quarters of Americans are overweight, but enough to create significant changes in consumer behaviour. A study by Cornell University has found that in US households where one person is on GLP-1 drugs, spending on snacks fell by between 6.7 and 11.1 per cent. If that doesn't sound like much, remember, this is the weekly shop for the entire household, not just the person on the jabs. Savoury snacks and sweet baked goods saw the biggest reductions, while spending on yoghurt, fresh meat and fruit and veg ticked upwards. In other words, the profits are on the move. Sales of snacks and ultra-processed foods will keep falling as the drugs become cheaper and more widely available. Within families, this may have unforeseen benefits. Children who grow up eating healthily are likely to maintain good habits into adulthood. It's not impossible, as one economist suggested to me, that this first wave of GLP-1 prescriptions will transform the food landscape so dramatically that our children's generation will no longer need drugs to survive it. Junk food manufacturers have always defended their business model on the grounds that they are merely giving consumers what they want. They may now find themselves at the sharp end of that argument. It turns out that consumers don't actually want to be fat and ill. We have been caught in a toxic feedback loop between our evolved appetites and the profitability of cheap, ultra-processed food. GLP-1 drugs have, for the first time, given us a tool strong enough to jemmy open that trap.
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
Doctors' union votes for ‘identity-based care' despite warning over lawfulness
The doctors' union has voted for transgender patients to have 'identity-based care' and called for this approach to be embedded into training. But the British Medical Association (BMA) has been warned the move risks going against the law, after the Supreme Court ruling in April that the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'. At the BMA's annual representative meeting in Liverpool on Wednesday, a majority of members voted in favour of a motion said to centre on 'respect, safety and dignity' of LGBTQ+ doctors and patients. In a speech in support of the motion, member Bethan Stanley described a 'blatant transphobia' in the current political climate, and insisted 'gender-affirming care is healthcare'. Urging her fellow members to vote yes, she said: 'I feel it is a no-brainer that we should support care that is going to improve the welfare and wellbeing of our patients.' To lengthy applause, she added: 'Trans women are women. Trans men are men.' The motion called on the BMA to 'affirm the right of all LGBTQ+ patients and staff to identity-based care and working conditions – defined as care and policies that actively account for the individual's lived, intersecting identities (including sexuality, gender, neurodivergence, race, and cultural background)' and for guidance and a 'lobbying strategy to embed this principle into NHS equality standards, training frameworks, and institutional policies'. Speaking against it, Louise Irvine said while it had a 'laudable aim of protecting LGBTQ+ and other people's rights to fair treatment' it also 'risks advocating that the BMA and other organisations adopt policies which are unlawful'. She noted two cases of nurses suing their health trusts for providing changing rooms based on gender identity rather than sex and urged the BMA to study the legal implications of the recent Supreme Court judgment. A group of nurses are challenging County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust over a policy allowing a trans colleague to use the female changing rooms at work, with their case due to be heard at an employment tribunal in the autumn. Meanwhile, in Scotland, nurse Sandie Peggie is suing NHS Fife after sharing a female changing room with a transgender doctor, with that tribunal expected to resume in July. Ms Irvine said: 'Lobbying for organisations to provide services on the basis of gender identity and not sex, means advocating that organisations disregard their public sector equality duty obligations. 'This could lead to legal liability for any discrimination or harassment experienced by service users expecting a single sex service.' She added that the BMA lobbying for organisations to adopt policies for patients and staff based on gender identity instead of sex 'could put us at variance with the law, with all the risks that that carries'. The vote reflected the 'deep passion within the profession for delivering truly personalised care', BMA representative body chair Dr Latifa Patel said. She said the court ruling 'does not prevent healthcare that takes gender identity into account' and said the union will 'call for clear, national guidance and a real lobbying strategy that enable doctors to deliver identity-informed care, so that no one is left behind'. The doctors' union has previously called for a delay to implementation of the Cass Review into children's gender services – which concluded gender care was an area of 'remarkably weak evidence' and young people had been caught up in a 'stormy social discourse'. NSH England (NHSE) last year rejected the call for a delay, saying it has 'full confidence' in the Cass Review final report. The BMA said it would carry out its own 'critique' of the report, which is yet to be published. While initially stating this would be shared with its UK council at its January meeting, a BMA spokesperson said: 'We want to be as sure as we can be that data collection and analysis processes are as rigorous and robust as possible; this requires time, rather than be rushed.'
The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
Genomic sequencing of English newborns raises big ethical questions
At first glance, the promise to 'leapfrog killer diseases' by predicting illness before symptoms arise is seductive. However, the inevitable gathering of clinical information about incurable conditions before consent for that knowledge is possible is far less desirable. Good intentions won't mask that overreach. READ MORE: Labour's welfare cuts 'to cost 300,000 Scots £500 per year' – Trussell We, as citizens and therefore NHS patients, must distinguish between what is clinically useful now, and what could cause unintended harm later to future citizens. There are serious, treatable conditions that warrant early detection, such as congenital adrenal hyperplasia, phenylketonuria, and medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency, already covered by the existing neonatal blood spot test. Others, like spinal muscular atrophy and severe combined immunodeficiency, might justifiably be added to this programme due to their treatability in infancy and tragic consequences if missed. However, full-genome sequencing is an entirely different kettle of fish, and one where children's future health profiles are shaped before they can understand their medical identity. Data might be used (or, god forbid, leaked) in ways they neither consented to nor benefit from, as many conditions flagged through genome sequencing may not be actionable until adulthood, even if they clinically materialise at all. In these cases, deferring screening until the individual is Gillick competent not only respects autonomy, but avoids unnecessary medicalisation, psychological harm, and downstream discrimination. READ MORE: EHRC changes guidance on single-sex toilets after legal challenge Scotland has long taken a more precautionary approach to data governance, consent, and health service design. Yet decisions taken in England – particularly those involving genomic infrastructure, research frameworks, and health data integration – affect the NHS as a whole. If new models of care are built around this profiling, Scottish patients could be pressured to participate in UK-wide systems by default, and NHS Scotland might be forced to adopt models shaped around English data flows and private-sector partnerships. That potential risk gains urgency when considering that more than half of Wes Streeting's campaign funding since entering parliament has come from private health interests. While there's no direct evidence of genomic firms funding policy, the climate is clear: expanding health data infrastructure creates lucrative opportunities for diagnostics, trials, and pharmaceutical development. Without robust regulation, public good may be compromised for private gain. READ MORE: See the full list of 127 Labour MP rebels on UK welfare and Pip cuts A more sensible and ethical approach for the UK Government to follow would be to: • Reaffirm a commitment to proportionate, consent-based screening, recognising the fundamental difference between life-saving early detection and speculative risk profiling. • Resist premature implementation of whole-genome sequencing in newborns without full public consultation and independent ethical oversight. • Support the development of anonymous, aggregate data models – suitable for population health planning without compromising individual autonomy or privacy. • Expand existing neonatal screening programmes only where early intervention is proven to change outcomes significantly, and where ethical and equitable delivery is achievable. • Establish robust UK-wide legal protections on the use, storage, and re-identification of genomic data, offering explicit guarantees against insurance or employment discrimination. If we truly value preventative care and personal empowerment, we must ensure these ideals are not compromised by haste or commercial capture. Progress in medicine should be grounded in consent, equity, and care, rather than outsourced potentially unaccountably. Ron Lumiere via email
