email PITY II

Legal Update - given by Ian Cohen at a recent meeting with PITY II

Ian began by discussing the recent press conference in relation to the litigation. He had received some communication from parents either by telephone or letter with their feedback. A number of the parents were happy with what was said at the press conference, particularly after copies of the press statements made by the Department of Health, Angela Jones from Alder Hey and the Vice Chancellor from the University had been sent out to all parents, although this feeling was certainly not unanimous as many parents were annoyed that they were not present at the conference.

Ian was keen to see follow-up, in particular letters of apology, which were currently being sent out to parents from Alder Hey and also was keen to see the change in the law. He added that he had written to the DoH to express concern that there was no ministerial presence at the press conference.

Ian stated following the press conference there were a large number of new parents, in the region of 100, who had come forward and contacted Goodman's. Goodman's were endeavouring to help these parents, i.e.: obtaining copies of medical records, post mortems in and certain instances, pursuing litigation.

At present at least 2/3 of these parents wanted to follow the litigation route for compensation. The national litigation group had not yet been informed, as Goodman's were not sure of the amount of people wanting to go forward for litigation. The remaining third of these parents currently only wanted information. Ian added that if any parent wanted to pursue the litigation, then it had to be as part of the national group of litigation. Goodman's were currently in the process of sending out 2nd questionnaires to these parents. Ian said that Goodman's would spend the next 6-8 weeks going through the new parents cases. Ian added that Goodman's were happy to provide information to all new families but with a view that these parents would be part of the national litigation group.

Ian added that we were still awaiting the outcome of the Coroners Review, which had been due to report in March, as yet nothing had been heard.

Ian went on to say that PITY II had done a great deal to assist new parents who suffered bereavement, he felt that because of PITY II many parents would now ask questions in relation to post mortems. His only frustration was that the change in the law was still not "set in stone".

Ian went on to say that in regards to the closing of the litigation mediation then the end process would follow shortly which was the necessity of the plaque being placed in Alder Hey. He added that in fairness, all points of the mediation had been met. He said he was aware of parents concerns that the plaque would not be placed in a prominent position in Alder Hey, but felt there would be no reason why Alder Hey would not facilitate this. In relation to an 'unveiling ceremony' he was unsure this would be carried out as it needed to be carried out in a sensitive manner without publicity.

Ian stated that the £100,000 paid to Goodman's recently as part of the settlement of the mediation group, which was to be paid to a charity of the parent's choice, was currently earning interest. He added that parents who had attended the mediation wished for the executive to be included in the decision making of the donation and wished the executive to use the newsletter to ask parents for their views on a suitable charity/charities. Ian added that there were two issues surrounding the money, one being if the money should be paid directly to one charity or if it should be divided and donated to a number of charities, this would then be an option for charities outside the Liverpool catchment area to be included. He stressed that one of the problems was being able to check the charities involved. So far three charities had been nominated, these being:

He added that because parents came from a number of regions, it was agreed that the money would be donated to hospitals within the North West. Ian raised concerns in relation to the Newborn Appeal with Jan Walton, because of the fact that part of the Newborn Appeal payments go to research. Ian felt that parents would have concerns with this and would not like the money to go to research but would go towards buying apparatus e.g. respirators or incubators. He had expressed to Jan Walton that there was no guarantee The Newborn Appeal would be included in the donations.

The PITY II executive felt that the choice of the donations should go out to the whole of the membership and beyond.

The executive expressed concern for parents who had not been involved in the litigation and who were also not part of PITY II. It was felt they should also be given an opportunity to say what should happen to the £100,000. There was concern by all in attendance that it needed to be established who would make the overall decision before deciding on which charity/charities would receive donations.

It was suggested that PITY II could process the letters for individual parents and that it might be possible to ask Alder Hey to forward them to all parents involved in organ retention, as because of the data protection act it was not possible for PITY II to have access to information regarding all parents involved.

Ian said he would write to Alder Hey asking for their co-operation in this matter.

Ian felt that a catchment area was needed to cover charities in North Wales, Chester, and Preston etc. He said the first step would be to identify the possible hospitals to receive a donation, then it would be necessary to make contact and then to decide which specific items were to be purchased or whether the donation would just go into the hospitals funds.

It was suggested that maybe a donation could be made to a charity that made provisions for children. The executive asked Ian how the Focus Group felt about a donation being made to Alder Hey. Ian said the parents involved in the Focus Group had strongly disagreed with that suggestion. He added that brainstorming was needed and he would take it back to the Focus Group and go on from there, as the money was earning interest at present there was no immediate need for a decision.