Martha's Rule is ‘reducing harm' as thousands seek second opinion, MPs told
Thousands of patients or their loved ones have sought a second opinion about their NHS care under the Martha's Rule initiative, MPs have heard.
Families have described how the lives of loved ones have been saved by the scheme and MPs have been told that it is 'improving safety' and 'reducing harm'.
More than 100 patients have been taken to intensive care 'or equivalent' as a result of Martha's Rule, the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee was told.
The initiative, named after teenager Martha Mills who died in 2021 aged 13, gives patients and their loved ones the right to a second medical opinion.
Patients, their loved ones or staff have raised concerns about care using Martha's Rule on more than 2,000 occasions, patient safety commissioner Dr Henrietta Hughes told the committee.
The initiative was launched in April last year in the name of Martha, who died from sepsis after suffering a pancreatic injury when she fell off her bike.
Her mother Merope Mills and her husband Paul Laity sounded the alarm about their daughter's health a number of times, but their concerns were brushed aside.
A coroner ruled she would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs of her rapidly deteriorating condition and transferred her to intensive care earlier.
So far 143 hospitals in England have signed up to the Martha's Rule pilot scheme.
Ms Mills has called for the initiative to be rolled out across the whole of the NHS.
Patients have reached out to the family to describe how the lives of their loved ones have been saved thanks to Martha's Rule.
She said: 'I'm very pleased with the progress that has been made with the implementation of Martha's Rule.
'More than 100 people escalated to ICU or equivalent is a really significant number and I've heard directly from people who feel a family member's life has been saved in this way, including an NHS nurse who was struggling to have her voice heard. She believes her husband is alive thanks to making a Martha's Rule call.
'What we really need now is to see Martha's Rule extended to all hospitals around the country. Everyone needs to have access to this service, which is changing NHS culture by giving patients more power, costs very little but has a huge impact.'
Dr Hughes told the committee: 'What's been fantastic around this is that the engagement not only of family members being able to escalate concerns, and we've had over 2,000 calls, which have led to more than 300 patients having an improvement in their care, and over 100 ending up being escalated to ITU or equivalent.
'I think it really shows that the patients and families have really valuable information that we can listen to, and if we act on that, then we improve safety and we reduce harm to patients, but also we improve things like staff morale, reduce numbers of complaints, etc.'
She added: 'So Martha's Rule is an initiative which was started after the tragic death of Martha Mills, and it's about giving patients and families the opportunity to get a rapid review if they're concerned about deterioration of the patient.
'It's been piloted in 143 hospital sites, and it's about giving the staff the ability to act on their clinical judgment, but also for patients and families if they're concerned that they're not being listened to, to be able to get a review from a critical care outreach team.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: A serious outbreak of old-fashioned class war hits the NHS
When a child needs medical help in an advanced wealthy country with a comprehensive health service, it ought to be a simple matter. The help will be provided. The child will be treated. So how can it be that the parent of such a child in a London suburb was told by her GP that the boy is not eligible for important therapy – because he does not attend a state school? Despite the rather ridiculous wriggling of the local NHS authorities, when confronted with this fact, we know beyond doubt that this was the reason given. Surely this is the most blatant discrimination against a social group, the significant minority, many of them far from rich, who pay school fees? Why should they not qualify for the NHS? They pay the same taxes as everyone else, and indeed reduce the burden on the state by allowing it to maintain fewer school places. After all, we are always told that the NHS is our proudest achievement, open to all, free at the point of use. It now has a 'constitution' in England, a document which proclaims that the service 'has a duty every individual that it serves and must respect their human rights'. Similarly, a Charter of Patient Rights in Scotland pledges that all will be 'treated fairly and equally and will not be discriminated against'. Look carefully at these documents and you will find them especially concerned with the 'protected rights' which preoccupy modern Left-wingers, listed in England as 'gender, race, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion, belief, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity or marital or civil partnership status' – though the pledge about age is perhaps less honoured than the others. The original sin of British discrimination, social class, does not even get a mention. Perhaps it is time it was included, even though the old-fashioned sort, top-down snobbery, is now very much in retreat. For we are seeing a growth in anti-private-school sentiment across the public and charitable sector. This begins to look very much like an outbreak of old-fashioned class war, especially since the VAT raid on private schools. This is quite obviously aimed at hurting the fee-paying classes. The large numbers of children who have since switched to state schools will surely have wiped out any notional gain. The class war goes wider and deeper. Few now seriously doubt that private school students face discrimination at the hands of Oxford and Cambridge Universities. Not long ago, the anti-bullying charity named after Princess Diana amazed fee-paying schools when it told them that it would no longer allow them to take part in events or host them – because of 'newly defined funding priorities'. Even more recently, sick children who attended private schools, including cancer patients, were refused a free education on the wards of one of Scotland's leading children's hospitals. Their parents were told to pay for the tutoring that state-school children received free. The authorities were quite unashamed and replied bossily to protests, telling one family 'as you have chosen to privately educate your son, he cannot be supported by this team, you have effectively opted out of state-funded education and supports'. Why would that be so? It is not as if parents who go private are given back the taxes they have paid, which support state schools. What we are seeing here is a revival of the anti-middle-class loathing and discrimination that used to be practised by Communist states in eastern Europe. It has no place in a free country and the Government should put a stop to it, now.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Boy, 8, turned away by NHS because he is a private school pupil, amid claims by MPs that Labour's raid on fee-paying schools has triggered 'class war' and 'discrimination' in our public services
An outraged mother has accused the NHS of 'shocking discrimination' after her eight-year-old son was denied vital treatment – just because he goes to private school. Tory MPs described the move as 'morally indefensible' and a symptom of Labour's 'vile class war', while the parent attacked the unfair 'two-tier' decision as a blatant breach of the health service ethos of offering equal treatment for all. Yet her case is just one example of private pupils being refused access to NHS services unearthed by The Mail on Sunday. The mother of the eight-year-old blamed Labour's war on private schools for emboldening NHS managers to deny her child help with his crippling joint condition. 'If you discriminate against children because of the school they went to, where does it end?,' she asked. Her son was referred to a paediatrician at Kingston Hospital in south-west London after she noticed he was 'struggling to hold the pen well enough to write properly', along with other mobility issues. At the hospital appointment she was asked to fill in a form which asked: 'Where does your child go to school?' And days later, she received a text message saying the child had been 'declined' the crucial next appointment with occupational health therapists. She then discovered that the specialist unit had written a letter to her GP saying: 'We are unable to see this child as we do not provide a service to school age children who attend an independent schools [sic]. We are only commissioned to provide a service to the mainstream schools.' The boy's older brother – who has the same condition, hypermobility syndrome – had been treated without issue several years earlier. Their mother, who wishes to remain anonymous while her son's case is 'in limbo', said: 'I have never been refused treatment for my children – until now. There is clearly a two-tier system at play. 'I have complained bitterly and asked who created these eligibility criteria and where it says in the NHS constitution that it's OK to discriminate against independent schoolchildren.' The mother of an autistic girl in Somerset told this newspaper her daughter was denied access to NHS mental health services, and was told: 'If you can afford the school fees, you should pay privately. If you had kept your child at the local authority primary school, she would have been supported.' It is understood that in Norfolk a child was refused a much-needed standing frame by the NHS because he went to private school. And last month we revealed how young cancer patients from private schools had to pay £115 an hour for tutoring in an Edinburgh hospital's wards, while it is provided free to state school pupils by the city council. Shadow schools minister Neil O'Brien said last night that the cases 'seem like incredibly unfair discrimination'. Citing Chancellor Rachel Reeves' decision to slap VAT on school fees, he said: 'Labour are already piling extra taxes on independent school parents. For their children to then be denied vital NHS services, which parents already paid for through their taxes, seems completely unfair. How can it be right that children with disabilities are denied services by the NHS because they attend a certain school?' Shadow equalities minister Saqib Bhatti said: 'This is shocking. No child should be penalised based on what school they go to. 'Ultimately, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson's vindictive attack on independent schools has legitimised this kind of pernicious discrimination and triggered a class war against our children. 'Now it falls to the Health Secretary to urgently review NHS policies to ensure nobody is denied access to healthcare, no matter what their background. 'We must not allow this quasi-Marxist class war to take root in our public institutions and certainly not in our NHS.' Shadow paymaster general Richard Holden added: 'The effect of front-rank Labour politicians targeting their vile class war on children who attend independent schools is brought into sharp relief by actions like this – where kids who need help are denied local NHS services. 'This culture of hate that Labour stoke out of perverse class envy has profound consequences for those in both state and independent schools but it'll always be the most vulnerable who suffer the most.' And Tory MP Greg Stafford, a member of the Commons' health and social care committee, said: 'Denying NHS treatment to a child because of the school they attend is morally indefensible and completely at odds with the founding principles of the health service. Care should be based on clinical need, not a postcode or a parent's school choice. This decision must be reversed – and fast!' The Mail on Sunday understands that other NHS trusts have also refused occupational therapy treatment to children because they attend independent schools. The eight-year-old, who attends a prep school in Kew, was denied an appointment with Richmond children's occupational therapy service that would have been the 'most important stage' of his assessment. It would have pinpointed the severity of symptoms – which include painful and easily dislocated joints and even problems with internal organs – and determined his future care. At its most debilitating, hypermobility syndrome can be classed as a disability, and experts say a specialist assessment is vital for children with the condition to prevent more serious issues. Physiotherapist Deepa Subramaniyan, a specialist in hypermobility at Adelaide Children's Physio clinic in London said long-term effects 'can include such severe mobility issues that a child can end up in a wheelchair. 'It's precisely for this reason that they need specialist assessment to determine how they should be treated. The earlier therapy starts, the better it will be in the long run.' When the mother received the notice that her son would not be seen by therapists at the unit – based at Ham Clinic and part of Kingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust – she said: 'I knew straight away something wasn't right because we have used this service before. 'At the hospital I was asked "Where does your child go to school?" I've never been asked that before. It was never relevant so why is it relevant now? The only thing that has changed is a new government. It is Orwellian.' The woman, who runs a small business with her husband, says the denial of an appointment was part of an 'anti-private school zeitgeist'. Branding her son's treatment as 'shocking and blatant discrimination', she added: 'Labour's dislike of independent schools is filtering down into the NHS and that is very damaging. 'The NHS has always been such a beacon of treatment for all. If you discriminate against children because of the school they went to, where does it end? 'In cases like my son's, they are effectively discriminating against children who are disabled and against some of the most vulnerable members of society. This is going to affect a lot of children if it is a new NHS protocol. Many people will not want to send their children to independent schools if it means foregoing NHS treatment.' Such an exodus would follow the record 11,000 pupils who have left the sector since Labour introduced VAT on fees in January. The woman added: 'I genuinely despair at what is happening. It's the demolition of the British private school system It feels like an ideological battle is going on.' The website of her local NHS Trust says children's occupational therapy services are offered to 'all school aged children who are residents in the Richmond or Kingston boroughs and attend a state-maintained Richmond school.' A spokesman declined to address specific claims that private pupils had been discriminated against but 'apologised if the wording in our correspondence caused upset. We are in the process of revising it to ensure greater clarity.' He added: 'Occupational therapy services are available to all school-age children who have an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) either through the NHS or the local authority. For children without an EHCP, advice may be available through existing NHS services provided in state school.'
Scottish Sun
3 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment
Got a health-related problem? Send it to Zoe, email below ASK DR ZOE I can't shift pink marks on my skin – they keep popping up but I can't get a GP appointment Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) OUR resident specialist and NHS GP, Dr Zoe Williams, shares her expert advice. Today, Dr Zoe helps a reader who has noticed marks on their skin. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Dr Zoe Williams helps Sun readers with their health concerns Credit: Olivia West 2 A reader sent in an image of their rash Credit: supplied Q) I HAVE some skin marks that I first noticed last year. I tried to see my doctor but could only get a phone consultation which, as you can imagine, was useless. They wanted me to email a picture, but I couldn't access the site. I've used a steroid cream, which I had for a different issue, and found it makes the marks go, but after a while, more appear elsewhere. They aren't sore or itchy, but this is really getting me down. Can you help? A) Thank you for sending the images of the rash, which appear to show oval salmon-pink-coloured patches on your torso. While seeing images of skin is helpful, we doctors usually need to get a history from the patient in order to make a diagnosis. I would like to know if, prior to the rash appearing, there was a single larger patch that came up first. If this was the case, then that would likely be the herald patch – a sign of the harmless skin condition pityriasis rosea. It usually gets better on its own over the course of around four to ten weeks. You say you first noticed skin marks a year ago, but I'm unsure if there was a period in between where it cleared. This could be a second episode of it. If this sounds likely, it will resolve on its own and a mild steroid cream can alleviate any discomfort if there is any. If you do not think it is this, then you need a consultation with a GP. Sun Health Explainer: Skin rashes - eczema, psoriasis, sepsis TIP: As we enjoy the summer, try to refrain from wearing sandals and flip-flops too often. Their lack of support can lead to calluses, corns and issues like plantar fasciitis, which causes heel pain.
