(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Gentleman for his remarks, and for his tone and approach in encouraging cross-party working—he is absolutely right that that will be essential for making progress on this most important issue. I will consider the important point he has made about the Ministry of Justice and its remit in relation to what we have seen in mortuary services. As I said earlier, in a report full of shocking revelations, that inhumanity and lack of dignity left me truly aghast; it is almost unbelievable that it could have happened.
The hon. Gentleman also raises an important point about women and their families across the country using maternity services. While the conversation we are having today is of course about the failures in Nottingham, we know that most women will receive high-quality care, and the majority of the NHS workforce do an important job supporting them. We should make sure that is acknowledged in this difficult conversation. However, one of the changes we want to make immediately is extending Martha’s rule to maternity services right across the country, because we know it is something we can do now. Martha’s rule is a mechanism that has worked well in other parts of the NHS, and it will mean that when women and their families feel they are not being listened to, they will have a way to get an urgent, independent review of the care they are receiving.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, and extend my thoughts to everyone who has been a part of the Ockenden review. I also hugely thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) for her unending efforts in campaigning for the families we represent in our constituencies, who have been through so much. Of course, I also thank Donna Ockenden for her work, her amazing support, and her constant engagement with us as the local affected Members of Parliament and with our constituents.
In the past two years, I have met so many families who have been harmed in ways I cannot understand or comprehend, and have heard of and seen horrors that I can barely believe. In addition to those babies and mothers who lost their lives, it is important that we highlight children like our mate Ryan, who recently turned 18 but who will never be independent because of his acquired brain injury. Can the Secretary of State please reassure the House that he will do everything in his power to support children with acquired brain injuries, such as by recognising their conditions in education, health and care plans?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I was personally inspired by meeting Ryan’s mum Sarah when I visited Nottingham last week—she told me about Ryan, and showed such incredible strength and courage in advocating for the forgotten children in Nottingham. I can reassure my hon. Friend and the whole House that I will do everything in my power to support children with acquired brain injuries. We are working on an acquired brain injury plan at the moment, and I am also working with the Department for Education and NHS England on ambitious reforms to the special educational needs and disabilities system, including on the future direction of EHCPs.
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberI am sure that the hon. Lady will agree that this is now one of the most heavily scrutinised clinical trials in this country in recent history, and rightly so—it is right that it is so heavily scrutinised and that we all seek assurances about the safeguards in place. It is right that, as Health Secretary, I made sure that I got those detailed safeguards before coming to the House to set out the Government’s position today.
The hon. Lady asked how usual it is for the MHRA to work with the sponsors of trials. My understanding is that the MHRA routinely works with trial sponsors to iterate the protocols in relation to those trials. Because this trial involves children and young people, for me, the bar should be exceptionally high, to ensure that those safeguards are in place. That is why, although my starting principle is that clinical evidence is the right way to approach such a matter, I wanted that extra reassurance. That is why I asked for the most detailed possible assurances from my clinical advisers, to ensure that those robust safeguards are in place in the way the trial is now designed.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
Before my election, I was a scientist—albeit not in the health sciences. Using that background, however, can I agree with the Secretary of State that healthcare practices and medical trials, like all scientific trials, must be led by expertise and evidence, not politics? Therefore, what precedent is there for politicians, including Members of this House, intervening in a medical trial?
My hon. Friend raises an important point about the relationship between politics and clinical evidence and clinically led decisions. Being led by clinical advice and clinical evidence is a decision that I and this Government stand behind. In this case, it is a matter where in considering some of the issues raised, I have felt uncomfortable and uneasy, but that commitment to clinical evidence, particularly recommended by someone as widely respected as Dr Cass, is the basis on which we can move forward. As I mentioned in response to the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, because this involves children and young people, I wanted to receive extra assurances that the clinical advice was robust and that the safeguards would be as robust as possible. That is the assurance I have received, it is what I very much wanted to receive before coming here today.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThe hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that getting the link between high street optometrists and secondary care working more effectively is vital. That is why I was pleased to announce the £20 million e-referral investment earlier this week. We are also working on a single point of access, to get the digital interface working far more effectively. He is right that we should be focusing on that more; there is a lot more to do.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
Particularly for people with a very low body mass index or an eating disorder, the use of app-based fitness classes for hours of ultra-high-intensity exercise every day can lead to addiction. When I wrote to one brand to ask about implementing access limitation tools in its app, it was dismissive. Will the Secretary of State consider reviewing whether such tools could be mandated to support those with eating disorders?
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue—it is an important angle on a problem of which we are all aware, but in a slightly different context, given some of the modern features that are available on the devices in our pockets. I will look into it further and pick it up with him in due course.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberBelinda’s story is shocking, and I hope that she is doing better. This strategy is, as I said, a total game changer. In particular, the renewal of this strategy, based on the previous strategy, sends a signal to the system that we will look at the experience of women and take it into account. We will look at the budgets and the return of money to the service to improve things. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said yesterday, there is nothing quite like seeing chief executives and chief finance officers suddenly notice—perhaps they had not noticed it before; they are busy sometimes—women’s clear dissatisfaction with gynaecology. The strategy sends a positive signal to improve the service, and that puts power in the hands of women.
The other real game changer is the online service. As I said, women, wherever they live, be it in Harlow, Bristol, rural Lincolnshire or coastal areas like Thanet—I have heard from Members from so many places this afternoon—will have access to online specialist treatment. There will be a further roll-out of diagnostic services, to get that diagnostic record back into neighbourhood healthcare, so that people can be treated closer to home. Building an NHS around women, women’s needs, women’s experiences—that is the game changer promised by this Labour Government.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
As a trained science teacher, I welcome the Minister’s news that through the strategy, the Government are launching a new programme to improve education for girls about their menstrual health, with additional funding from this year to support targeted work in schools and community settings. Does the Minister agree that this programme will support girls’ knowledge of menstrual health, and when to seek healthcare?
I thank my hon. Friend for his expertise, and I agree that the programme will do that. When I was first told about menstrual cycles as a young girl, I was told to hide what happened, even from my father and my brother in the household, let alone my peers in school and so on. We have come a long way, and it is good to have so many good advocates to help us. Education in school is central to that.
(9 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
As a migraine sufferer, I am afflicted about once a week by debilitating symptoms, which always include partial blindness, and sometimes include numbness in my fingers, nausea, brain fog, sensitivity to light and sound, a pounding headache and even an inability to speak—heartbreaking for a politician. I am very lucky, though, that my migraines generally only last half an hour; other people’s can be much worse and last days. What steps is the Minister taking to improve support for migraine sufferers like me?
At national level, a number of initiatives support service improvement and better care for patients with migraine. The Getting It Right First Time neurology programme published a national specialty report that made several recommendations to improve recognition and diagnosis of migraine by GPs. Additionally, the RightCare toolkit sets out key priorities for improving care for patients with migraine, including correct identification and diagnosis, and NHS England has established a multi-year, clinically led neurology transformation programme—so, lots.
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
I thank all hon. Members in this evening’s debate, particularly those who secured the debate but also the many who shared their incredibly powerful stories.
We have heard from several Members about the failures at Nottingham university hospitals NHS trust to keep mothers and their babies safe. In 2019, my constituents Carl Everson and Carly Wesson were expecting their daughter Ladybird. During the pregnancy, Carl and Carly were told that Ladybird had a fatal chromosomal abnormality—trisomy 13, also known as Patau’s syndrome. They were told that she was incompatible with life and that if she survived the pregnancy she would live only briefly and in severe pain.
Faced with that devastating prognosis, Carl and Carly made the agonising decision to end their pregnancy. Two weeks after Ladybird’s funeral, they were told during an appointment that the long-term culture test showed a normal female carrier type. There was no evidence of Patau’s; Ladybird had been a healthy baby. Carl and Carly later learned that Ladybird’s death was not inevitable. It was the result of a misdiagnosis and a failure to follow national guidelines around abortion.
The Abortion Act 1967 requires two doctors to form an opinion in good faith, but Carl and Carly learned through their investigations that the second medical practitioner was, at best, used as a rubber-stamping exercise. That failure led to the loss of a very much loved and wanted child. Carl and Carly have spent six years fighting for answers—six years navigating a system that should have protected them. Today they continue their fight for answers and are working every day to ensure that guidelines around abortion are properly followed by doctors and that laws are updated if required.
The second family that I have worked closely with on this issue over the past year have been the Sissons. Sarah and Tony Sissons did not lose their son Ryan—indeed, Ryan joins us in the Gallery today—but every day they mourn for the man Ryan could have become. Ryan was born healthy, but just three days after his birth, a sequence of errors and neglect at Nottingham city hospital caused him to suffer a catastrophic brain injury. Consequently, Sarah and Tony were told that Ryan would never be able to walk or talk.
Sarah was just 19 years old, and was given no help to navigate her drastically changed life; instead, the Sissons were handed a leaflet about adoption. I understand that that leaflet is still framed on a wall in their house. Ryan told me today about how he learned to march in the sea cadets—he showed me in Westminster Hall and he was damn good at it; he did a pretty good job of walking and talking as far as I was concerned.
Last month Ryan turned 18, but he did not go out with his friends to the pub to celebrate. He is not applying to universities or doing an apprenticeship. Sarah and Tony are preparing their home so that Ryan can live with them for the rest of their lives. Sarah gave up her career to care for Ryan. She spent his childhood fighting to get that care, battling with the NHS and local authorities, attending endless appointments and mourning the big life milestones that Ryan never really got to reach.
Ryan is the oldest child being considered in the Nottingham Ockenden review. Among the nearly 2,500 families affected, Ryan is the first child. Ryan should not have been the first of thousands. The failures of Nottingham university hospitals NHS trust should have been learned long ago, but they were not. Those responsible have not yet been held accountable. Ryan should have had the chance to enjoy a happy, healthy childhood. Ladybird should be with her parents, far away from a House of Commons debate on baby loss.
Despite the efforts made today by myself and colleagues, it is not possible to put into words how the failings of the NUH trust have profoundly impacted so many lives in our community. I hope, deeply, that this Government are going to provide the justice that they deserve.
Several hon. Members rose—
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons Chamber
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
I wanted to share some of my experiences and, with her support, the experiences of my office manager, Becca. Becca and I agreed that the issue we wanted to raise in the debate is dignity.
Becca’s nan, Pat, lived with dementia for over a decade. She received care both at home and, later, in a specialist dementia care home. At home, the care she received was poor. When carers visited, Pat was left in inappropriate clothing, unwashed or not taken to the toilet. Her husband, then in his late 80s, and their daughters were left to care for her. When Pat moved into a care home, the quality of care improved. The staff clearly cared for her, and over time she became one of the longest-residing residents. Some carers treated her like family. But even in a good care home, the pressures of understaffing meant that dignity was often the first thing to be compromised.
Pat’s husband and daughter visited her every day. They noticed that she was frequently dressed in clothes that did not belong to her, despite everything being clearly labelled. Sometimes, other residents wore the outfits her family had chosen for Pat. As a result, Pat was often left in ill-fitting clothes. Worse, carers did not always have time to take Pat to the toilet. Pat’s daughter would have to raise that she had to go to the toilet, or that she needed to be cleaned and dressed. Every day, she had to advocate for her mother to ensure that she was treated with the dignity she deserved.
My nan, Hilda Duffield, was born Hilda Caunt in 1918. By the time she was 90, Hilda—nan—was losing mobility and suffering memory loss. Ted, my grandad, had become her devoted carer and took over all the domestic tasks. After some time, nan was diagnosed with dementia. I remember the disease becoming increasingly entangled with and amplifying her already worrisome nature. She started to become angry, flying off the handle with stress over where grandad was—whether he was in the next room or had popped to the shop. The disease took an increasing hold over her as time progressed.
My nan and grandad continued to manage together for several years, but the situation changed rapidly when grandad became ill himself in autumn 2012. When he was admitted to hospital, it was clear that nan needed full-time care. After a few weeks in residential care, she was moved to the same nursing hospital as grandad, and she was present at his bedside when he died in January 2013. They had been married for 73 years.
With my grandad’s death, my nan’s dementia worsened. She was moved to a care home near my uncle Neil in Bolton, as he and my aunt Eileen would be able to spend time with her during the day. I, however, never saw my nan again after she moved to Bolton. By all accounts, by that stage she had no memory of me or of much of my family. She spent her days hallucinating and had become abusive to care home staff; I remember my uncle Neil telling me how he regularly heard her screaming words he did not know she knew at people who were trying to help her. We decided as a family that there was no benefit to me or to several other family members visiting, and that it was better for everyone who could to remember her as she was before her mind was taken by that cruel disease. I do not know if that was the right thing to do. I never will.
By the end, like Pat and so many others who suffer with dementia, my nan had lost her dignity to that disease. She had lost everything and needed those around her to maintain her dignity for her. In Erewash and across the country, so many more have stories like those I have shared today. Not all those suffering have someone who can advocate for them, but I hope I have gone some way towards doing so today, as have my colleagues across the House—my gratitude goes out to all of them.