Latest news with #clinicalnegligence
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Health
- Telegraph
Australia proves we don't have to suffer under the NHS
If I had to summarise the NHS in two numbers, they would be 27 and 18. The first – £27.5bn – is the liability for botched maternity care since 2019, when our world-beating health system has left women and infants crippled or dead. The second, £18bn, is roughly the amount the NHS spent on maternity services over the same period. Read through the documents the NHS provides, and you will find the usual bland statements about 'avoidable errors' and 'devastating consequences' for mothers, children, families and 'the NHS staff involved'. Actual meaningful improvements are thin on the ground, with the Care Quality Commission rating two thirds of maternity units inspected as 'requires improvement' or 'inadequate' for safety. Perhaps more in line with health service thinking is a 2018 appeal from the chief executive of the NHS confederation to cut compensation for clinical negligence. It is an unfortunate observation that the scandal-ridden state of NHS maternity services isn't particularly unusual: in every field of care, the incompetence of the health service is killing people who would otherwise have had a chance at living. Over on social media, an appeal for Britons to share stories 'about the time the NHS tried to kill you' has now been viewed 3.7 million times in around 36 hours. Heartbreaking lists of dead siblings, dead children, lost limbs and botched surgeries have come rolling in. That almost everyone in Britain seems to have a story where the NHS has catastrophically screwed up their care, or the care of someone close to them, isn't a strange coincidence. Hard numbers show that the NHS, to put it bluntly, is awful. Infant mortality rates are 16pc higher in Britain than in peer countries. Breast cancer survival rates are well behind average. Fatality rates for heart attacks and strokes are higher. The UK's treatable mortality rate – the rate of deaths which could have been averted with better healthcare – is 69 per 100,000 people, adjusted for age. The equivalent rate in Australia, to pick an example not entirely at random, is 46 per 100,000. It would be tempting to say that this is a matter of NHS resources. The UK has fewer doctors for every 1,000 inhabitants (3.2) than the United States (3.6), Ireland (4.1) or Australia (4). We also lag behind Bulgaria (4.9), Russia (3.8), and Kazakhstan (4) among many others. We also have fewer CT and MRI scanners – roughly one fifth the level of Australia – and fewer hospital beds. But in financial terms, this wouldn't quite be right. Adjusted for price levels, we spend considerably more per person than countries like Japan, Italy and New Zealand, while performing far worse in terms of treatable deaths. And when the NHS does get resources, it wastes them. Productivity in the health service has slumped back to its level in 2012, with all the technological gains since then swallowed by the sheer inability of the organisation to change and adapt. The core problem is one the health service has been grappling with since its foundation. There are no real price signals – the GP contract is still largely based on the characteristics and number of patients on a practice's books, rather than on actual work done – and there is no market where patients choose between providers based on their successes and failures. It's certainly true that the resulting system is fair, in that it fails to treat rich and poor alike. But it's untrue to claim that it somehow avoids trade-offs between people when deciding who gets care. A fully private healthcare system allocates treatment based on your ability to pay. The British system, meanwhile, allocates it based on your ability to wait. The result is spiralling waiting lists, without the additional resources brought into the system that a monetary system provides. Moreover, a fully private system isn't the only alternative on offer. The US healthcare model has been used to scare the public for decades, trotted out every time NHS reform has been suggested. I've never seen the Australian system used as a scare tactic, and that's probably because British people know it works. The Australian model is a hybrid. There is universal insurance in the form of Medicare, and there is private insurance purchased from the market. Healthcare providers are a mix of public and private. High earners who don't choose to buy an 'appropriate level of private patient hospital cover' pay a tax surcharge of between 1pc and 1.5pc of their taxable income to encourage self-reliance. Far from following Lord Kinnock's call for tax raids on private healthcare, there's a system of tax rebates for those who take out policies. The result is a system that provides excellent, convenient healthcare. Patients on the 7.4 million NHS waiting list have been on it for an average of 95 days. The average patient in Australia goes from diagnosis to surgery within 46 days. It works for patients, who get better outcomes. It works for doctors, who are voting with their feet. Junior doctors, in particular, who face random allocation to training places and competition from overseas graduates, must be sorely tempted. And it certainly works for the taxpayer. Add up spending across the public and private sectors, and Australia spends a little under 10pc of its GDP on healthcare. Britain spends 11pc. One per cent of GDP might not sound like a huge amount, but it is. In a UK context, it's about £26bn a year: enough to cut roughly 4p off the basic rate of income tax, or cut your council tax bill by two thirds. Or, of course, it could close half of the £50bn black hole in the public finances that Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves may need to backfill by the autumn. Healthcare is far from the only area where Britain has something to learn from its offspring. Australia has us whipped in living standards, government efficiency, taxation from income and fuel, pensions, and the rest. Once we've dealt with health, we could do a lot worse than sending our own Iwakura Mission down under to learn from our cousins. But first things first: let's kill the NHS before it kills us.
Daily Mail
14-07-2025
- Sport
- Daily Mail
Former Man United player SUES them over 'clinical negligence' on 'medical advice' they gave him after repeated injuries before he left on a free transfer
A former Manchester United player is suing the club for alleged 'clinical negligence' in relation to the 'medical advice' given to him during his time at Old Trafford. According to The Telegraph, Axel Tuanzebe, a 27-year-old defender who came through the Man United academy, has lodged a claim with the High Court. The Democratic Republic of Congo international made 37 appearances for United in an injury-ridden spell at Old Trafford. He made his senior debut in January 2017 and left the club in September 2023, joining Ipswich and helping them in their promotion to the Premier League. He had joined United at the age of eight. He represented England at youth level before making his DR Congo debut in 2024. While on the books at United, Tuanzebe had loan spells at Aston Villa, Napoli and Stoke City. He made 45 appearances in two seasons for Ipswich before joining Burnley on a free transfer last month. During his time at Old Trafford, Tuanzebe had a number of injury issues, including a season-ending problem picked up in December 2019 when playing against Colchester in that year's Carabao Cup. A foot problem ruled him out of the start of the next campaign while he also missed the first half of the 2022-23 season. In October, he suffered a bizarre issue when cutting his thumb when doing the washing up. He needed surgery to save the thumb after doing damage to tendons.
The Sun
14-07-2025
- Sport
- The Sun
Axel Tuanzebe suing Man Utd for ‘clinical negligence' over ‘medical advice' given to defender
MANCHESTER UNITED are being sued by former player Axel Tuanzebe over "clinical negligence", according to reports. The 27-year-old, who now plays for Burnley, has lodged a legal claim against his old club at the High Court over the "medical advice" they gave him, according to The Telegraph. 3 3 3 Tuanzebe joined Man Utd at the age of eight and went on to captain them at every level. However, he left the club in 2023 following an injury-ravaged time in the senior team, resulting in him making just 37 senior appearances. The Telegraph report says lawyers for Tuanzebe refused to comment on the lawsuit, filed around two years ago when he left the Old Trafford outfit. Man Utd declined to comment when approached by SunSport. During his Red Devils career, Tuanzebe went on loan spells with Aston Villa, Napoli and Stoke. And despite some impressive outings in a Red Devils shirt, including a Champions League clash against Paris Saint-Germain which saw him pocket Kylian Mbappe and Co, he never managed to become a regular. But in just two seasons with the Tractor Boys, he appeared more than he did across seven years from his Man Utd debut to when he left the club on a free transfer. His medical issues first began in October 2019 when he suffered a hip injury in the warm-up of Man Utd's 1-1 draw with Liverpool. The former England youth star was then ruled out for the season after injuring himself in a Carabao Cup win over Colchester in December. A foot injury then ruled him out of the start of the following season. He then had another lengthy spell on the sidelines at the start of the 2023/23 season and did not train until January. And injuries continued to hamper his ability to play regularly. In October, Tuanzebe suffered a freak injury after he cut his thumb while doing the washing up and needed surgery to save it. That saw him miss four games, while he then suffered a hamstring injury which kept him out from the start of December to mid-January, while he then missed two more games with a broken thumb in March. .
Telegraph
14-07-2025
- Sport
- Telegraph
Former Manchester United player is suing club for ‘clinical negligence'
Axel Tuanzebe is suing Manchester United for alleged 'clinical negligence' linked to 'medical advice' they gave him. Telegraph Sport can reveal that the 27-year-old, who left United two years ago when his contract expired, has lodged a legal claim at the High Court. Lawyers for Tuanzebe declined to comment on the action brought by a player who endured an injury-plagued career at United before joining Ipswich Town in September 2023. He helped Ipswich win promotion to the Premier League that season but left when his deal ended following their relegation, signing for Burnley last month ahead of their own top-flight return. Tuanzebe joined United's academy at the age of eight and went on to captain them at every level but, after being handed his senior debut in January 2017, he made just 37 appearances for the club over the subsequent six-and-a-half years. The DR Congo international, who represented England's youth teams, did have loan spells at Aston Villa, Napoli and Stoke City in that time but injuries thwarted his efforts to become a regular at Old Trafford. His problems first began when he suffered a hip injury during the warm-up of United's 1-1 Premier League draw with Liverpool in October 2019. He was then ruled out for the rest of the season after injuring himself in a Carabao Cup victory over Colchester United that December. He missed the start of the following campaign with a foot injury and had another lengthy spell on the sidelines at the beginning of 2022-23 and did not return to training until that January, after which he joined Stoke City on loan. Injuries continued to plague him until he joined Ipswich, where he made more than 40 appearances after establishing himself as their first-choice right-back. In October, he suffered a freak injury when he cut his thumb while doing the washing-up, requiring surgery to save it. United have been approached for comment about a lawsuit filed barely two years after they announced Tuanzebe's exit in a glowing tribute on their website. It read: 'His departure is an emotional one for the player and many at the club who have known and helped nurture him over the years. A fine character, he leaves United universally respected as a credit to himself and his family. 'Everyone at the club would like to extend our best wishes to Axel as he embarks upon the next chapter of his career. We would also like to thank him for always representing Manchester United with class and dignity.' The legal dispute is the second they have faced in relation to Tuanzebe. It emerged in November that the club had received demands for payments from an Football Association -licensed intermediary claiming they had agreed to compensate him for helping broker the player's loan move to Stoke. Telegraph Sport has been told the intermediary in question reported the matter to the FA citing an alleged breach of their Football Agent Regulations. The dispute is said to be ongoing.
The Independent
13-05-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Ministers slammed over ‘jaw-dropping' NHS negligence claims for poor care
The NHS must do more to reduce 'tragic' incidents of patient harm and cut 'jaw-dropping' payouts for poor care, MPs have warned as costs spiral to a record high. Compensation for clinical negligence claims cost £2.8bn in 2023-24 – up from £2.6bn the year before – with hundreds of millions paid out in legal fees. The highest number of claims were for failings in emergency medicine, obstetrics, orthopaedic and general surgery, with maternity care payouts costing the most, totalling £1.1bn last year. The Department of Health and Social Care has set aside an 'astounding' £58.2bn to cover the potential costs of clinical negligence events occurring before April 2024. The public accounts committee sounded the alarm on the rise, saying ministers needed to get a grip on NHS finances. Its chair, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, said: 'The fact that the government has set aside tens of billions of pounds for clinical negligence payments, its second most costly liability after some of the world's most complex nuclear decommissioning projects, should give our entire society pause. 'It must be a priority of the highest order for the government to reduce tragic incidences of patient harm and lay out a mechanism to reduce legal fees to manage the jaw-dropping costs involved more effectively.' The most recent NHS data shows 4,076 incidents of severe harm to patients and 4,449 patient deaths were recorded by the NHS in just three months from October to December last year. And a fifth of last year's record £2.8bn compensation bill – £545m – went to lawyers. That amount is higher than the entire expenditure of the government's legal department, the report found, which totalled £341m in the same year. In the past five years alone, NHS Resolution, which manages negligence claims, has spent over £12bn on payouts – £2.4bn of which has been spent on claimants' legal fees. 'If we can reduce the leakage of lawyers' fees in the middle, that benefits the whole of the NHS, because there will be more money available for other services,' said Sir Geoffrey, Hospital chiefs in England warned last week that they have been forced to cut nurse and doctor posts and scale back emergency and maternity care to meet the government 's 'eye watering' savings demands for 2025-26. The committee challenged the DHSC to set out how it intends to 'reduce tragic incidents of patient harm' and manage the costs of negligence 'more effectively'. Acknowledging the high cost of payouts for maternity care failings, Sir Geoffrey said the difference between some maternity units and others 'is quite significant'. He said: 'Obstetrics is an inherently dangerous process, so the line between doing harm and negligence is quite narrow, but the NHS need to look carefully at why some units do get more negligence claims than others.' MPs on the committee also criticised the DHSC, which they said 'lacks a grip of the financial pressures it faces'. MPs also raised concerns over the 'uncertainty' surrounding the abolition of NHS England, announced in March, which they said had created 'high levels of uncertainty for patients and for staff'. They said the DHSC had a 'lack of firm plans' for its closure and reducing its headcount by 50 per cent. 'At the moment, it looks a little bit like shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic. We really want to make sure that this thing is going to work properly,' Sir Geoffrey told The Independent. 'It has been two months since the government's decision to remove what up until now has been seen as a key piece of machinery without articulating a clear plan for what comes next, and the future for patients and staff remains hazy,' he said. MPs highlighted how some hospitals in England had pushed through unauthorised special exit packages – severance payments which require Treasury sign-off because they are new or contentious, totalling more than £180,000 in 2023/24. 'There remain far too many special severance payments where approval has only been sought after the payment has been made,' they added.
