Transparency, Gagging Orders and Hospital Negligence Claims

Recent news stories have made much about hospital negligence claims, perceived secrecy on the part of the NHS and the gagging orders departing doctors are subject to when they leave their roles. Indeed, according to the Independent, as many as 90% of doctors have confidentiality clauses in their severance agreements.

This secrecy and mistrust on the part of the NHS betrays an underlying issue: what are the NHS trusts which use these clauses so scared of? The confidentiality clauses are there to prevent concerned doctors becoming whistle blowers after retirement, when they no longer have a job to fear for. But putting these gagging orders into place costs time and money which is being diverted away from patient care. If that time and money was spent on improving patient care, wouldn't the need for hospital negligence claims be drastically reduced, or even eliminated? Wouldn't the NHS be able to stop worrying about doctor's concerns if the powers that be could listen to them, take them on board and improve things?

This brings us onto another major criticism of the current system. There is a widely perceived lack of transparency in cases of hospital negligence claims. Too many injured patients feel that doctors and health trusts are closing ranks and failing to give them the answers they need about what went wrong with their treatment and what will be done to prevent similar mistakes occurring in future. Many of these patients feel driven to making hospital negligence claims in order to just get answers.

Whilst there is no denying that patients who fall victim to injury should be entitled to compensation from hospital negligence claims, the legal fees associated do cost the NHS dearly. Listening to the concerns of front line healthcare staff is surely the only way to improve care, driving down legal costs and in turn diverting more cash to patient care.