header-logo header-logo

09 July 2021
Issue: 7940 / Categories: Legal News , Professional negligence , National Health Service
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: A doctor’s view on neonatal brain injuries & clinical negligence investigations

The NHS pays out about £2.4bn in compensation each year, about one third of which is for legal fees, yet both clinical staff and families are left dissatisfied with the results of the clinical negligence system. A doctor shares her opinion on flaws in the system, in this week’s NLJ

Lorin Lakasing, consultant in obstetrics and fetal medicine at St Mary’s Hospital, London, looks into some of the reasons why high value obstetric claims related to neonatal brain injury account for more than half of settlements paid out.

Lakasing writes that senior, often remote, managers often deal with complaints despite not being in the room at the time. Moreover, midwives and mothers are subjected to unrealistic goals.

She writes that ‘escalation often occurs after the opportunity to be proactive was missed so emergency protocols are actioned…the countdown on the hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy clock has begun. Whatever is said and done thereafter matters not’.

The ensuing investigation, requiring hours of interviews tends to examine intrapartum events [during labour and immediately after childbirth].

Lakasing writes: ‘The misapprehension of analysing poor outcomes by focusing solely on intrapartum events is born of laziness and a poor understanding of the service. Precursors to poor outcomes lie in the antenatal period but these remain largely unscrutinised. To do so would be complex, unpopular and onerous.’

Read more here.

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll