The Estate of a deceased patient, whose treatment was the subject of review by the Urology Services Inquiry into care within the Southern Health and Social Care Trust, has recovered substantial damages in relation to the loss and damage experienced by the deceased patient prior to his death in 2020. Whilst it was not contended, for the purposes of the legal proceedings, that the patient had died by reason of the substandard care that he received, it was the Plaintiff’s case that the patient suffered a significant progress in his localised prostate cancer leading to increased pain and suffering and an accelerated death.
The patient was referred to Craigavon Area Hospital by his General Practitioner after he had undergone a prostate specific antigen test which was markedly elevated. Subsequent testing led to a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Whilst his care was considered by a Multidisciplinary Team and a recommendation was made in relation to the course of treatment, the patient did not receive the recommended treatment. In June 2020, he suffered a marked deterioration in his health due to urinary retention, was admitted to inpatient hospital care and was required to undergo a transurethral resection of his prostate, following a further CT scan which demonstrated that his prostate cancer had become locally advanced and metastasised to multiple lymph nodes. Unfortunately the patient continued to deteriorate and died on 18th August 2020.
The Trust admitted negligence in the defence of the claim. The Estate of the Deceased argued that by reason of the substandard care, the Plaintiff’s cancer grew and spread much more quickly than it ought to have done had appropriate care been provided. The lack of appropriate treatment, they contended, meant that the prostate cancer did not go into remission. Failing to ensure that the appropriate care was commenced meant that the disease was less well controlled. Had appropriate care been provided, it was contended that the Deceased would not have suffered urinary retention, and would have avoided admission to the Hospital in relation to retention, catheterisations, problems with catheterisations, and the subsequent transurethral resection of the prostate gland.
Pursuant to receipt of the Defence admitting liability in this case, the parties engaged in discussion with a view to disposal of the action leading to the agreement to pay total damages in the sum of £50,000 plus full costs. Our client, the representative of the Estate comments:-
“Clear, unambiguous advice…I extend a huge thank you to Patrick Mullarkey and his excellent team (Rosemary Watson). Our case was dealt with efficiently and professionally with a strong emphasis on client care…no improvements necessary, excellent experience by a client”.
