Adverse Side Effects of Medication Archives

If you have suffered a loss, an injury or the deterioration of an existing condition due to the adverse side effects of medication, it may be possible to claim hospital negligence compensation. In order to claim injury compensation for the adverse side effects of medication, it has to be demonstrated that there was a known risk of side effects from the medication you were prescribed, or that you were administered medication for either too long or in the incorrect dosage.

Compensation claims for the adverse side effects of medication also have to show that you did not contribute to your injury due to your own lack of care. If you failed to take medication at the intervals or in the quantities that were prescribed for you, or you failed to alert a medical professional when an adverse side effect of medication started, you may still be eligible to make a claim for hospital negligence, but how much compensation for the adverse side effects of medication you received may be reduced to reflect your contributory negligence.

For professional legal advice about claiming compensation for the adverse side effects of medication, you are invited to call our Freephone Advice Line for accurate and informative help from an experienced medical negligence solicitor. All calls to our Freephone Advice Line are completely confidential, and you will be under no obligation to proceed with a claim for the adverse side effects of medication once you have spoken with us.

Mar 02 2021

Swine Flu Vaccine Side Effect Compensation of €990k Recommended for Teenager

Adverse Side Effects of Medication

A swine flu vaccine compensation award of €990,000 has been recommended by a mediator in the High Court action taken by a 16-year-old boy who developed a rare sleep disorder after being administered with it.

In November 2020, Benjamin Blackwell’s action was settled in a pivotal settlement which is set to make way for the settling of 80 compensation cases linked to the Pandemrix vaccine which were have still to come before the High Court.

The case had been reschedule so the amount of the settlement could be brought before the court. It was agreed that the teenager, due to the terms of settlement, should get half of the settlement figure which the High Court has heard in his case amounts to €990,000.

The Blackwell settlement was without an admission of liability. In that case Benjamin Blackwell alleged he contracted narcolepsy and cataplexy — an associated muscle weakness — after he was administered with the Pandemrix vaccine at national school when he was five years old.

That legal compensation action was used as a test case for 80 other compensation related to the vaccine which was developed to deal with the swine flu pandemic of 2009 and 2010.

This week in the High Court, Justice Kevin Cross ruled the mediator’s award was not outside of the remit of what was reasonably open to him and should not be changed from that. He did note, however, that the mediator’s decision be appealed to a retired judge who will then decide on the issue.

Mr Justice Cross said: “Without in any way interfering with the jurisdiction of a retired judge on appeal from the mediator and without in any way wishing to fetter his or her discretion to set aside the award if he or she believes that it did indeed fall outside the range, it follows from the above that in my view the award did not fall outside the range and should not be interfered with.”

Submissions still have to be heard by the judge will in relation to how the parties wish to proceed in relation to the mediator’s decision. Mr Justice Cross said the significance of Benjamin’s condition is not in doubt and he fully believed the recounting of to his condition as set out in the determination of the mediator and in submissions for him.

The judge said the parties had tackled the mediation talk as specified by the agreement and the mediator awarded a gross figure of €1.98million which lead to a figure of €990,000. He added that Benjamin’s advisors are not satisfied with this award and applied to the court for a direction as to whether the offer should be accepted by the boy and his family.

Mr Justice Cross said the group settlement of these such compensation cases by parties under mediation as approved by the court is something to be appreciated and that it represents an enormous saving of court time and the costs by everyone. That, he said, would have been prohibitive if cases had to go ahead. Now, the judge said, cases do not have to be litigated and the possible trauma to the individual plaintiffs and their families is avoided.

Nov 20 2019

Woman (27) Settles Case in Relation to Swine Flu Vaccine

Adverse Side Effects of Medication

The family of a young woman who took legal action against the State and drugs company GSK in relation to her contracting the sleep disorder narcolepsy after being administered with the receipt of the Pandemrix vaccine has slated as “a national scandal” the millions of Euro in taxpayers money spent defending the case by the State.

Aoife Bennett (27) who was given the vaccine when she was a child during the height of the Swine Flu pandemic fears in 2009, settled her case with the Department of Health and Health Service Executive (HSE) at the High Court. The confidential settlement is without an admission of liability.

The High Court action was last week informed that that key data on the vaccine was not included in Irish medication reports because it was considered to be “useless.” However, that data indicated that Pandemrix had a ten times greater danger for serious side effects than a sister vaccine produced by the same company.

Ms Bennett and her family expressed their wished that that the State decision to settle their action will clear the path for around 100 other pending claims over narcolepsy to be settled with proper compensation being paid to claimants.

The vaccination compensation settlement for the student teacher was awarded against the Department of Health and the HSE. GSK and the Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA) were not party to the settlement and will not pay anything in relation to costs or compensation.

Aoife’s mother Mary Bennett said “It is a national disgrace that millions of taxpayers money has been wasted in defending my case and other similar cases against children and young people who do not have any right to legal aid.” She went on to say that the public was not made aware that there were safety concerns over the vaccine – and she called for a thorough review of the drug regulatory system in Ireland.

The Bennett family also hit out at the way they were treated over the past decade by the State. Ms Bennett had broken down while giving evidence in the High Court. Her parents Pat and Mary said: “The behaviour of the defendants prior to and during the trial has been exceptionally hostile. Further, the State Claims Agency have taken a very adversarial approach in dealing with Aoife’s case. The aggressive cross examination of Aoife, and us as parents, over four days is something I hope will not be replicated for other families. Today, Aoife has succeeded in recovering compensation and her case has been vindicated. However, no money will ever compensate Aoife for a lifetime of living with the incurable disability of narcolepsy and cataplexy.”

Aug 13 2019

Use of Vaginal Mesh ‘Unsafe’ for Incontinence Treatment – UK Expert

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Hospital Medical Malpractice, Hospital Medical Negligence

Chartered chemist Dr Chris DeArmitt, an expert witness who has helped over 9,000 women settle their vaginal mesh compensation actions successfully in the United Kingom, has expressed the opinion that devices such as these are not safe for the treatment of incontinence.

Dr DeArmitt commented, during an interview with Sky News, that “there are two main reasons why any plastics material expert will tell you just obviously that this is a bad material and I have never heard anyone who disagrees with me. I see an absolute disregard for proper testing. Testing is way less than you would see on a vacuum cleaner or a washing machine. It’s shocking. I’ve never seen anything like it in my career.”

Vaginal mesh devices are usually used in operations to address stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP); two conditions women can develop a condition for after natural childbirth or later in life.

Speaking previously, Minister for Health Simon Harris said the suspension in Ireland of all surgical procedures involving these devices would remain until such time as the Health Service Executive implements 19 recommendations from Chief Medical Officer in Ireland, Dr Tony Holohan, at the end of 2018. The report said that the transvaginal mesh implant (TVMI) devices, used for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, can no longer be regarded as safe or acceptable for first line treatment. He said that these devices should only now be used in the management of complex cases, where other treatment options have not been successful or are not deemed appropriate.

Holohan said that it is still appropriate to use mesh for a mid-urethral sling for stress urinary incontinence and also as an abdominally placed mesh for dealing with prolapse.

There were a number of compensation claims submitted in in Ireland during 2017. This came about after the women in question, according to their legal teams, who were dealing with pain issues witnessed news programmes in the UK describing legal actions thee. They had been unaware of the link between their pain and and the vaginal mesh devices device prior to seeing the reports.

The US Food and Drug Administration(FA) in the USA made the sale and distribution of all mesh that was to be implemented in relation to pelvic organ prolapse illegal in 2019. These steps were implemented after a public campaign that involved over 100,000 people are suing in the United States in relation to injuries and illnesses. They allege that their illnesses and pain arose from the use of vaginal mesh devices.

Jeffrey Shuren, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health said: “Patient safety is our highest priority, and women must have access to safe medical devices that provide relief from symptoms and better management of their medical conditions.”

Feb 03 2019

€63,000 Kidney Injury Compensation for Child Fell in Tayto Park Accident

Adverse Side Effects of Medication

A €63,000 playground slide injury compensation award has been approved at the High Court in relation to a Tayto Park accident where a now 16-year-old boy fell on August 26, 2013

Presiding Judge Garrett Simons was advised that Seán Kelly was ‘doubled up’ in pain following a fall that occurred when he was exiting the run-off area of the slide. Those nearby administered First aid to him and he threw up a number of times. His family brought him to their local doctor, for further treatment later, and he was then sent him to Tallaght Paediatric Emergency Department. Here an X-ray revealed that he had sustained a grade two injury to his kidney.

11-years-old at the time of the incident, Seán Kelly was involved in the accident at Tayto Park, Co. Meath. Judge Simons was told that Seán – who resides with his family at Coolkill, Sandyford, Dublin – was informed he should be wearing shoe covers to deal with the friction from the slide when he fell off the run-off section, and landed on the side of tubing injuring himself

Following his diagnosis, Seán’s was prescribed a course of antibiotics to tackle his kidney injuries. He has fully recovered by the following January.

Barrister Patrick O’Connell SC, representing Seán in Court, told the Judge that there was an insufficient number of supervisors in place for the children when they were getting off the slide. Mr O’Connell added that the slide was polished to a high degree and was particularly slippery at the run-off area. In addition to this he said that the sides of the slide should have been coated with foam or rubber. This would have meant there was less chance of an injury occurring if a child slipped on it. There was also a claim that the slide should have been built so that users would come to the end of the run and not be in a position to get off it before then.

Justice Judge Simons was advised that a Tayto Park accident compensation offer of just under €63,000 had been agreed between all parties. Judge Simons gave his approval playground fall compensation settlement.

Jul 07 2017

Advice about Making a Lip Filler Injury Claim

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Hospital Medical Negligence

Ensure you get appropriate and relevant legal advice from a solicitor about making a lip filler injury claim for compensation against a cosmetic surgeon.

In Ireland, lip filler procedures are usually carried out without complication. Although patients can suffer bruising, swelling and bleeding around the lips as a result of the procedures, these symptoms often disappear quickly with no long-term adverse effects. When more serious or permanent injuries occur, it may be possible to making a lip filler injury claim depending on the nature of the injury and its cause.

However, making a lip filler injury claim can be complicated. If you signed a contract consenting to the procedure after having been informed the injury you sustained was a possible risk, the cosmetic surgeon will deny liability for your injury. Similarly, if the injury could not have been avoided at the time and in the circumstances, a lip filler injury claim for compensation will likely be unsuccessful.

The success of a lip filler injury claim largely depends on the same criteria as a medical negligence claim – that “on the balance of probabilities” the cosmetic surgeon, the surgery, or an agent of the surgery demonstrated a lack of skill, and that lack of skill resulted in you sustaining an avoidable injury. Because the criteria is similar to a medical negligence claim, you cannot apply to the Injuries Board for an assessment and your case has to be handled by a solicitor.

After reviewing any pre-treatment contract you entered into and asking you about whether or not you gave your informed consent, your solicitor will usually engage a medical expert to ascertain the level of injury you have sustained, confirm that it could have been avoided with greater care, and – in the event of asymmetry or other irregularities – assess whether the injury can be reversed.

Once sufficient evident of negligence has been collected to support your lip filler injury claim, your solicitor will write to the cosmetic surgeon, providing details of the claim made against him or her, and requesting an offer of settlement. Should you be approached at this time by the cosmetic surgeon or their insurance company with a private offer of settlement, you must refer it to your solicitor.

When negligence has been acknowledged, your solicitor will negotiate an appropriate settlement of your claim based on the level of injury you have sustained, your pain and suffering (include mental suffering if you have experienced a lack of confidence), your age, previous state of health and your motive for undergoing the procedure in the first place.

Because of the complexity of making a lip filler injury claim, it is very important that you seek professional legal advice that is relevant to your specific circumstances. There are many different types of injury that can be sustained due to negligent lip filler procedures, and each one will affect patients differently. Therefore ensure you get appropriate and relevant legal advice from a solicitor at the first possible opportunity.

Apr 26 2017

Sodium Valproate Side Effect Claims Launched in France

Adverse Side Effects of Medication

A class action comprising several hundred sodium valproate side effect claims has begun in France to compensate children who sustained injuries in the womb.

Sodium valproate is an active ingredient of the drug known in Ireland as Epilim. In 1983, Epilim was introduced into Ireland after having been successfully used in France for treating patients for epilepsy and bipolar disorder. The drug was also prescribed in Ireland to treat migraine because it stabilises electrical activity in the brain.

Sodium valproate breaks down in the bloodstream and is absorbed as valproic acid. If taken by pregnant women, the valproic acid can enter the womb and have an adverse effect on the development of the foetus. Children exposed to valproic acid in the womb have been born with a wide range of development issues including spina bifida and autism.

Allegedly, the sodium valproate side effects were suspected before Epilim was introduced in Ireland but, due to the limited studies that had been conducted on the foetal development issues, the information available at the time was considered to be inconclusive. However, France’s National Agency for the Safety of Medicines (ANSM) has now looked deeper into the issue and produced a disturbing report.

In the preparation of its report, ANSM researched the health of 8,701 children born between 2007 and 2014 whose mothers had taken the French-branded equivalent of Epilim during pregnancy. The agency identified up to 4,100 children suffering from sodium valproate side effects along with hundreds of stillbirths attributable to the active ingredient.

ANSM´s report has prompted hundreds of sodium valproate side effect claims that have been combined to make one large class action against the manufacturer of Epilim – Sanofi. The sodium valproate side effect claims are currently being made on behalf of children in France who have been diagnosed with foetal valproate syndrome, but is likely to expand across the world.

In Ireland, there are no records relating to children who have been diagnosed with injuries due to foetal valproate syndrome, and a support group for parents – the FACS Forum – has called upon the government to conduct an audit to identify the scale of the problem. The support group hopes the audit will result in support being provided for parents of children suffering from sodium valproate side effects.

For further information about what support is currently available for children exposed to valproic acid in the womb, the FACS Forum can be reached via the disability-federation.ie website. If you would like to find out more about the sodium valproate side effect claims being made in France, you should speak with a solicitor.

Aug 10 2016

Settlement of Compensation for Scarring due to Hospital Negligence Approved at Court

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Hospital Medical Negligence

A High Court judge has approved a €100,000 settlement of compensation for scarring due to hospital negligence at a hearing of the High Court in Dublin.

Ann Ryan from Rathdrum in County Wicklow gave birth to her second daughter at the National Maternity Hospital in Dublin on 19^th October 2012 – just twenty-five weeks into her pregnancy. Baby Sophia was transferred to the Special Care Unit, where catheters were inserted to help with her feeding and administer medication.

The areas of Sophia´s skin surrounding the catheters were cleaned with chlorhexidine rather than the usual sepsis-preventing povidone-iodine. This action was undertaken as part of the National Children´s Research Centre´s “SKA trial” – a trial that Ann had agreed to take part in provided that Sophia did not experience any discomfort or side effects.

However, the morning after her transfer to the Special Care Unit, nurses noticed redness and ulcerations on Sophia´s back. The condition was diagnosed as being an adverse reaction to the antisepsis treatment and, because Sophia was in distress from the pain, she was administered morphine intravenously and Fucidim – a cream used to prevent bacterial skin infections – was applied to her skin.

As the condition failed to improve, the Fucidim treatment was discontinued the following day and an alternate cream applied – Duoderm. The redness and ulcerations began to fade, but Sophia has been left with discoloured skin on her back and a scar that was diagnosed in May 2014 as being consistent with a chemical burn.

Through her father – Tom – Sophia claimed compensation for scarring due to hospital negligence; alleging that the Holles Street hospital had been negligent in her treatment. It was also alleged that, due to the discolouration of the skin on her back, Sophia will likely require a skin graft in the future.

The hospital offered to settle the claim without an admission of liability for €100,000 and, at the High Court in Dublin, Mr Justice Richard Humphries was given the details of the settlement offer along with a synopsis of Sophia´s treatment after her premature birth. The judge approved the settlement of compensation for scarring due to hospital negligence and also ordered that the hospital pay the Ryan´s legal costs.

Jun 20 2016

Compensation for a Cardiac Arrest due to Medical Negligence Approved at Court

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Hospital Medical Negligence

A settlement of compensation for a cardiac arrest due to medical negligence has been approved at the High Court in favour of a woman in a vegetative state.

On 1^st November 2010, Pauline Carroll from Mountmellick in County Laois attended the Midland Regional Hospital in Tullamore for a consult on the progress of her cancer treatment. Pauline (65) had undergone surgery on a tumour earlier in the year and, since August 2010, had been undergoing chemotherapy treatment.

However, rather than see a doctor first, Pauline was immediately started on another session of chemotherapy. When the doctor saw Pauline an hour later, he said that the treatment should not have been started because her white cell count was 1.07, whereas it should have been at least 1.5 before undergoing a further course of chemotherapy.

Two days later, on 3rd November 2010, Pauline suffered a cardiac arrest at her home. She was taken to hospital where she suffered a second cardiac arrest, causing her to suffer brain damage. Pauline is now in a permanent vegetative state and is cared for around the clock in a specialist nursing home.

On his wife´s behalf, Kevin Carroll claimed compensation for a cardiac arrest due to medical negligence – alleging that the treatment should not have been administered before Pauline had seen the doctor, particularly when it was known that she had suffered cardiac pain three months earlier and the chemotherapy drugs she had been treated with were cardiotoxic.

The Health Service Executive (HSE) denied liability for Pauline´s injury – arguing that there was no connection between the administration of the chemotherapy and Pauline´s cardiac arrest and brain damage. However, at the High Court, Mr Justice Kevin Cross was told that the HSE had agreed to a settlement of compensation for a cardiac arrest due to medical negligence without an admission of liability.

According to details of the settlement, Pauline will receive €975,000 compensation for a cardiac arrest due to medical negligence and the state will pay for her care for as long as she lives. Judge Cross approved the settlement, commenting it was a “very good legal outcome for what has been an unfortunate and tragic outcome”.

Nov 02 2015

Judge Increases Award made by Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Hospital Medical Negligence

A High Court judge has increased an award made by the Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal after hearing an appeal from a woman who developed encephalopathy.

The unnamed plaintiff was one of thousands of women who in 1977 were given an anti-D immunoglobulin blood transfusion infected with Hepatitis C. In 1998, the plaintiff had been awarded €298,000 by the Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal, but she had returned to the Tribunal earlier this year, seeking more compensation after developing “life destroying” side effects of brain damage and cirrhosis of the liver.

The Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal awarded the plaintiff a further €180,000 but, on the basis that a previous case had been settled for €250,000 after a woman had developed similar injuries, the plaintiff appealed the decision to the High Court. The Minister for Health opposed the plaintiff´s appeal on the grounds that the case was different to the one in which the higher award was made.

The Minister of Health argued that the plaintiff received treatment for Hepatitis C before her condition was diagnosed. However, at the High Court, Mr Justice Bernard Barton heard that the plaintiff´s “decompensated cirrhosis” had been triggered by the ribavirin therapy she had undergone in 2013 to treat the Hepatitis C virus after tests revealed a serious deterioration of her liver.

The judge also heard that the plaintiff had developed encephalopathy as a result of her treatment – a side effect which manifests as slurred speech and forgetfulness, and which is irreversible and requires ongoing medical treatment to control its effects. The encephalopathy condition had resulted in severe mental anguish it was claimed.

Judge Barton found in the plaintiff´s favour – saying that the High Court had the jurisdiction to compensate the woman for the pain and suffering arising out of the treatment she underwent in 2013. The judge said that it was “only fair and reasonable” that the award by the Hepatitis C Compensation Tribunal be increased to €250,000 to reflect the full and independent life that the plaintiff could no longer lead.

May 01 2015

Claim for the Inappropriate Use of Syntocinon Heard in Court

Adverse Side Effects of Medication, Birth Injury in Hospital, Cerebral Palsy due to Hospital Negligence, Hospital Medical Malpractice

The High Court has heard details of a claim for the inappropriate use of Syntocinon during labour, which resulted in a baby being born with kinetic cerebral palsy.

On 20th July 2007,Patrick Brannigan was born by emergency Caesarean Section at Cavan General Hospital after his mother had been administered Syntocinon to speed up her labour (you can read about the risks associated with Syntocinon here).

The synthetic drug was administered despite a CTG trace showing that Patrick was in distress in the womb and, rather than help facilitate his delivery, the Syntocinon had the effect of depriving Patrick of oxygen.

Patrick was born suffering from dyskinetic cerebral palsy. Now seven years of age, Patrick is confined to a wheelchair and has no means of communication. He is cared for full-time by his parents and will never be able to lead an independent life.

Through his mother – Niamh Brannigan of Castleblayeny, County Monaghan – Patrick made a claim for the inappropriate use of Syntocinon during his mother´s labour, alleging that medical staff at Cavan General Hospital mismanaged his birth.

Cavan General Hospital acknowledged that the drug should never have been administered when there were signs of foetal distress and apologised to the family. A €2.1 million interim settlement of Patrick´s claim for the inappropriate use of Syntocinon was agreed, subject to approval by a judge.

Earlier this week at the High Court in Dublin, the circumstances leading up to Patrick´s birth were related to Mr Justice Kevin Cross. Judge Cross heard that Patrick is a cheerful, good humoured boy before approving the interim settlement of compensation.

The judge then adjourned the claim for the inappropriate use of Syntocinon for three years in order that reports could be compiled into Patrick´s future needs. It is hoped that legislation is passed within the next three years in order that a periodic payment structure can be used to resolve Patrick´s claim for the inappropriate use of Syntocinon.

Archive for Category: Adverse Side Effects of Medication

Freephone Advice Service