Am I Right To Be Feeling This Way?
Family Life0 min ago
Hospital Fined
for death of baby - what is the point of fining the hospital when they are supposedly so short of money? Wouldn't it be better to sack those involved?
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lankeela. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
thanks, goodgoalie. Well, perhaps the money returning to the government will encourage them to increase staff numbers - it seems this has already happened at this particular trust. If the errors were related to staff being overworked, which they may well have been if they were understaffed, there's no point in sacking them.
https:/
As above, utterly, utterly pointless. The hospital trust (funded 100% by the Exchequer) pays £800k to er...the Exchequer. There is an £800k hole in their budget. So where do they look for replenishment. (Clue: T__ E___eq__r).
"District Judge Grace Leong said she was "acutely aware" the fine would be paid for by funding that would usually be used for patient care."
So the people who made these grave errors, and their managers who are responsible for their work, walk away. Meanwhile £800k gets shovelled from one line on the hospital's balance sheet to another on the Chancellor's books. And then back again next year.
As above, utterly, utterly pointless. The hospital trust (funded 100% by the Exchequer) pays £800k to er...the Exchequer. There is an £800k hole in their budget. So where do they look for replenishment. (Clue: T__ E___eq__r).
"District Judge Grace Leong said she was "acutely aware" the fine would be paid for by funding that would usually be used for patient care."
So the people who made these grave errors, and their managers who are responsible for their work, walk away. Meanwhile £800k gets shovelled from one line on the hospital's balance sheet to another on the Chancellor's books. And then back again next year.
NHS units are exempt from corporate manslaughter legislation. When it was a bill, they applied for exclusion. The grounds will make you laugh. They might be convicted ! Minister said yes yes of course!
Fines ( payable to the state) are different to damages paid to the heirs. - see the long appalling ( unread) threads about penalties and fines
they are assessed on income. Babies have no income. Worf abart a tenner den. ( £10 000).
if a unit is crap, it is vv diff to fire - Maternity services, quality, responsibility for, - official
he will just say he wasnt there but on a quality trg day.
any other points arising
Judgie baby said she was well aware that it wd come out of lu-lu for services and so she fixed it at £800 000k
Fines ( payable to the state) are different to damages paid to the heirs. - see the long appalling ( unread) threads about penalties and fines
they are assessed on income. Babies have no income. Worf abart a tenner den. ( £10 000).
if a unit is crap, it is vv diff to fire - Maternity services, quality, responsibility for, - official
he will just say he wasnt there but on a quality trg day.
any other points arising
Judgie baby said she was well aware that it wd come out of lu-lu for services and so she fixed it at £800 000k
//NHS units are exempt from corporate manslaughter legislation.//
Are you sure about that, Peter?:
https:/
"The Crown Prosecution Service announced in April 2015 that for the first time they are charging an NHS Trust for corporate manslaughter, a criminal offence, following the tragic death of a young mother at the Pembury Hospital in October 2012."
As it happened, the trust (Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust) was acquitted after a judge found that there was no case to answer. But the prosecution still took place.
Are you sure about that, Peter?:
https:/
"The Crown Prosecution Service announced in April 2015 that for the first time they are charging an NHS Trust for corporate manslaughter, a criminal offence, following the tragic death of a young mother at the Pembury Hospital in October 2012."
As it happened, the trust (Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust) was acquitted after a judge found that there was no case to answer. But the prosecution still took place.
1 to 18 of 18
