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.
4th December 2018
Jonathan Austen-Jones represented the Claimant (“ER”), a 53 years old man who was taken by ambulance to the Royal Sussex County Hospital on 4 March 2017 after suffering with abdominal pain over the previous two days. Continue reading »
RH sought help and advice from Jonathan Austen-Jones to investigate a potential claim for clinical negligence against the Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust following back surgery carried out by one of its orthopaedic and spinal specialists.
Continue reading »
29th November 2018
Gazebos are used by all kinds of organisations when attending events up and down the country. It may not seem that an employer’s duty to assess and minimise workplace risks would extend to tasks such as carrying and assembling gazebos, but a recent case shows that it does. Continue reading »
28th November 2018
In order to succeed in a ‘secondary victim’ claim as a result of clinical negligence it is necessary to establish that the claimant suffered psychiatric illness or injury – as opposed to grief, sorrow, deprivation or the need to provide care for the loved one who has suffered the injury – as a result of witnessing a sudden, shocking event. Given the number of hurdles a claimant has to clear to show that the many tests have been met, there have been very few successful claims to date. Continue reading »
26th November 2018
Two recent cases illustrate that employers need to be vigilant in assessing tripping and slipping hazards in areas where workers perform their tasks. If they fail in this duty, those who are injured as a result may be able to claim compensation. 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 »