The ongoing investigation into the blood transfusion of the 80s and 90s has seen first wave of compensation handed out.
On the one hand I agree that when there is an NHS fuck up. Improper cleaning of instruments, malpractice etc. The nhs should pay.
I feel in this instance it's not so warranted.
It looks as though we are talking billions of pounds to victims. Possibly hundreds of thousands to millions paid out to individuals.
It certainly requires a lot more reading around the subject.
But from what I've garnered over ongoing battle has been that. The government might havee put in place blockers, but those bockers may have led to a lot more deaths of people need transfusions.
Hepatitis c wasn't known about until 89. I'm not sure what the nhs could have done in this case.
I feel there's a level of compensation necesaary for a lost life and suffering. But at the same time . Mother in pregnancy whonlost a lot of blood.cwould we have rather not had transfusions ready to go? But take the risk?
I am sure there will be a lot alive today who were just lucky they didn't receive tainted donations and plasma.cwhereas sadly there are some unlucky ones who did.
Bit would they all be here had we refused all donations and tested?
I dont get how you apportion blame and compensation for a strain thay couldn't even be diagnosed for several years.
I think there's a balancing act on thesr things. And I think it's been balance poorly if the rumours are to be believes the compensation pot is 10bn. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I have to agree with you on this one. This isn't a case where the NHS knew that the blood was infected, or negligently used the wrong type. This is a case where the patient would have died without a transfusion and there was no way of determining what was clean blood and what wasn't.
It's a tragedy that so many people have died from being given contaminated blood products, but it's less of a tragedy than if they had received no treatment and had died earlier. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
When the NHS is a publicly owned service the government (tax payer)are liable for the negligence.
The impact of this scandal is deep and wide, and I feel for anyone who lost a loved one to such circumstances.
People were failed and died, no amount of money will compensate their loss and I agree their partners / family should be compensated, how that feels to be compensated is an unknown to me and I’m not sure how I would feel receiving money in place of loved one.
Putting that aside, what angers me is the crash for cash companies who are chasing the ambulances on this years after the event, google blood transfusion compensation and you will see what I mean.
They need investigating, closing down if they are promoting wrong doing, taking large sums etc. and any dodgy solicitor involved need striking off |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
So government buys contaminated blood products on the cheap from the USA leads to who need dyalasis and blood transfusions to contract hepatitis and hiv through no fault of thier own .and you are saying they do not deserve compensation from the people that did this to them and did everything to hide lie and obvuscate the truth .they deserve every penny for losing parents siblings children and other family members |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man
over a year ago
Terra Firma |
"So government buys contaminated blood products on the cheap from the USA leads to who need dyalasis and blood transfusions to contract hepatitis and hiv through no fault of thier own .and you are saying they do not deserve compensation from the people that did this to them and did everything to hide lie and obvuscate the truth .they deserve every penny for losing parents siblings children and other family members "
The government uses our taxes to pay health professionals to make decisions.
The narrative, "it is all the governments fault is incorrect".
They are paying for the poor health service again through our tax £'s. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So government buys contaminated blood products on the cheap from the USA leads to who need dyalasis and blood transfusions to contract hepatitis and hiv through no fault of thier own .and you are saying they do not deserve compensation from the people that did this to them and did everything to hide lie and obvuscate the truth .they deserve every penny for losing parents siblings children and other family members "
Some will have been from USA. Others are domestic. Again. Had we have not had them, then possibly many other die from no plasma or transfusions.
I also didn't say they weren't entitled to compensation. seemingly this pot is going to be huge and I'm not too sure how negligent we can really call the nhs on this.
Regarding the case in hiding knowledge I haven't seen any committe or court decide on this.cas I am still eating only that the charity bringing the case suspected as much.
Again.
We had a lack of these products within the NHS at the time. It seems a damned if you do, damned if you don't
If you've got the further reading on the nhs willingly hiding the evidence. Id love to read.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
