Every medical procedure has risks, whether it is an invasive or non-invasive treatment. This does not mean that people should be warned off undergoing surgery altogether – on the contrary, many operations are life-saving or have the potential to greatly improve lives. However, patients should be made fully aware of the risks prior to giving their consent to treatment.
Some operations can have miraculous results. For example, laser eye surgery has the potential to restore a person’s sight so that they no longer need corrective lenses. However, this form of treatment requires a high level of specialist skill and if you are injured due to the negligent actions of the professional, you may have grounds for a clinical negligence claim.
If you have been suitably warned about the risks of having the procedure performed, and something has gone wrong, your surgeon has a stronger chance of avoiding liability than if he or she had failed to make you aware of the dangers.
However, if your clinician underplayed the risks of the operation – a Which? study conducted in 2009 found three well-known laser eye clinics had done this – then you could stand a higher chance of securing compensation.
“Patients need to understand what the risks are,” says the Medical Defence Union.
The organisation added, “they need to think about whether or not the benefits they think they will get from the procedure actually outweigh the risks, in order to decide whether they want to go ahead with it.”
Furthermore, if clinical negligence results in you suffering long-term problems, such as corneal ectasia, you may be entitled to claim compensation for these injuries.
Potential problems caused by incorrectly performed laser eye surgery include dry eyes, sometimes resulting in chronic eye inflammation, reduced night vision, the appearance of ‘floaters’ and blindness.
19th February 2019
A supermarket worker who cut her thumb while working on the fish counter has secured compensation from her employer after her injury led to her developing a serious infection. Continue reading »
Everyone has a right to complain about their neighbours’ behaviour, but where such complaints are unjustified and take the form of harassment the consequences can be severe. In one such case, a flat dweller who made a fellow resident’s life a misery was ordered to pay him almost £100,000 in damages. Continue reading »
18th February 2019
Consumers have a right to expect that the goods they purchase are of satisfactory quality and do not expose them to risk of injury, as was illustrated by a case in which a homeowner won the right to compensation after a furniture unit came apart and fell on his foot. Continue reading »
11th February 2019
Opticians don’t just sell glasses, they perform an important role in spotting potential problems that need to be referred to a doctor. In a case on point, a schoolboy who was left almost blind after an optician failed to detect a benign brain tumour won almost £500,000 in compensation. Continue reading »
21st January 2019
One of the most tragic effects of serious head injuries can be that victims lose the ability to make rational decisions and can be intensely vulnerable to exploitation by others. However, a case in which a crash victim won seven-figure compensation showed that specialist lawyers can see to it that measures are put in place to provide protection. Continue reading »
23rd November 2018
A radical proposal for cycling awareness has been unveiled by the government. The plans include a series of measures to improve safety for vulnerable road users, and to encourage and support cycling. The aim is to reduce the significant number of serious and fatal accidents suffered by cyclists. Continue reading »
24th July 2017
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced measures to tackle fraudulent sickness claims. Fraudulent claims of food poisoning by holidaymakers which are false or exaggerated claims, could result in British tourists paying higher package holiday prices. Continue reading »
27th February 2017
The last revision of the discount rate was undertaken on 25th June 2001, when it was set at 2.5%. From 20th March 2017, the rate drops from 2.5% to minus 0.75%. It is a change of 3.25 percentage points. Continue reading »
21st January 2016
Jonathan Austen-Jones acted on behalf of the applicant in this case who was the subject of sexual abuse at the hands of his step-father between the ages of about 5 and 7.
An initial application for compensation pursuant to the 1990 Scheme was made in 1992 and in June 1996 he was awarded £10,000.00 in respect of the abuse he had suffered. This award was clearly too low and it appears that no psychiatric evidence was before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). Continue reading »
Jonathan Austen-Jones acted on behalf of the claimant in her claim for damages for clinical negligence. The claim arose from the tragic loss of her baby’s life as a consequence of the failure of the Defendant Trust, appreciating that baby B had a Group B streptococcus infection at his birth on the night of the 1st January 2009, resulting in baby B’s death at 00.55 hours on the 3rd January 2009. Continue reading »