Parents’ pain at son’s unnecessary death compounded by delay in admission of liability

Posted 01/07/2010

A couple from Hampton Hargate in Peterborough have now received the apologies they were seeking from the NHS Trusts responsible for Peterborough District Hospital (PDH) and Leicester Royal Infirmary (LRI), following the unnecessary death of their three year old son. However, both they and their solicitor are frustrated by the fact that the apology, and modest financial settlement, took nearly three years to extract in spite of the overwhelming evidence supporting their allegations and attempts made by their solicitor to get the case addressed and settled at a much earlier stage.

Mr and Mrs Hopp suffered the tragic loss of their son Jonathan, “JJ”, in July 2006. He became ill and was admitted to PDH on 12th July. Following initial investigations and treatment he was transferred three days later to LRI where there was more specialist paediatric capacity. He was thought to be suffering from pneumonia but there were other concerns about his health. Although his pneumonia appeared to be improving, a totally new symptom of what was thought to be a heart murmur was detected on 18th July whilst he was at Leicester. This increased in severity on following days but he was not examined by the cardiology team nor were any investigations of the cause of this made.

On 21st July he was transferred back to PDH without any further investigation of his heart symptoms. He was still on intravenous antibiotics and these were to be administered in the hospital but the staff at PDH decided that JJ could spend his days at home, just returning to the hospital overnight to receive his treatment. This resulted in his not being seen by senior doctors who generally made their ward rounds during the day time.

During the hours that JJ was in hospital and his heart murmur was again recognised and noted to be changing in character and eventually a doctor noted that he should be checked by ECG. Although this would have been an easy investigation to have carried out it was not done although no reason was ever offered for this. Instead this was eventually scheduled for 25th July. JJ was therefore allowed to spend the night at home on 24th July, with a view to returning early on the morning of 25th for his antibiotics and his ECG. Tragically when his mother went to wake him on the morning of 25th July she found he had collapsed and was unresponsive. He was taken to hospital but pronounced dead.

Post mortem results revealed that JJ had been suffering from pericarditis which led to a condition known as cardiac tamponade, in which the pressure of the fluid on the heart prevents the heart from functioning properly or at all. What had been reported as a heart ‘murmur’ was actually the sound of what is called heart ‘rub’ and this was an early sign of the inflammation caused by the pericarditis. Investigations, had they been undertaken as it was claimed they should have been, would have identified the problem, he would have been treated and would have made a full recovery.

Mr and Mrs Hopp have been represented in their legal case by Trefine Maynard, a clinical negligence specialist at East Anglian solicitors Ashtons Legal. She explains:

“Once I had obtained copies of the relevant medical notes and reviewed these I became convinced that there had been failures at both hospitals. Despite the fact that the heart symptoms had been recognised no adequate investigations into the cause of this were made. When JJ was returned to the care of the PDH, and despite the fact that they did record the heart problems, again there appeared to be no consideration of what this might signify. It seems that on his return to Peterborough he was never actually reviewed by senior clinical staff and this seems have played a part in the failure to properly assess him. Tragically one of the doctors who reviewed his notes clearly was worried and it was he who noted down that JJ should have an ECG. No explanation of why this was not carried out but instead was delayed until the 25th July has been given. JJ and his family were tragically let down by both hospitals and whilst his parents are grateful that responsibility for his death has finally been accepted they naturally remain devastated by the loss of their son.

After we had reviewed the records and identified what we thought the mistakes had been we wrote to both hospitals in early 2008 setting out the anticipated case. We hoped that the hospitals or those representing them would take early steps to investigate the claim and settle the case in order to allow Mr and Mrs Hopp to start to come to terms with their loss and rebuild their lives as soon as possible. This was not to be. The NHS Trusts denied liability. It was almost two years later that the NHS Trusts finally admitted liability and offered both financial compensation and the letters of apology which had been requested. Although the final outcome was the right one, it would have been better for all parties involved if liability had been admitted and settlement reached much earlier in the process.”

Mr Hopp adds: “To the NHS Trust we no doubt appeared to be names on a piece of paper. The reality was that JJ’s death was devastating for both of us and the additional distress caused by our inability to get an early apology took its toll. The final settlement included awards for psychiatric trauma for both myself and Jayne, as well as reflecting the loss of JJ. Now, finally, we are starting to rebuild our lives, hoping fervently that both hospitals will have learnt lessons from the tragic and avoidable death of our son and that no other parents will be put through this heart-rending experience.”