Families impacted by maternity failings in Nottingham have rejected NHS England’s newly proposed chair for the review and asked them to decline the offer.
In response to the appointment of Julie Dent as new chair for the NHS’ investigation into poor maternity care in Nottingham, bereaved families say they were left “distressed” and “traumatised” following the announcement on Friday afternoon.
More than 100 families wrote to the health secretary Sajid Javid on 7 April setting out concerns about NHS led the review, which has been ongoing for six months.
In their letter they called for a new review to take its place led by Shrewsbury maternity inquiry chair Donna Ockenden, followed by a public inquiry.
Following the news on Friday that Ms Dent, not Donna Ockenden has since been appointed to chair the review the families have asked for Ms Dent to decline NHS England’s offer.
Donna Ockenden responded to the families’ original letter on the day it was sent and said she would be pleased to lead the review, subject to being asked, according to an email circulated by representatives of the families.
None of the families were contacted by NHS England, Nottingham University Hospitals Foundation Trust or local commissioners prior to the appointment being made nor did they recieve a resonse to their inital letter they have said.
Sarah and Jack Hawkins’ daughter Harriet died following a catalogue of failings at Nottingham City Hospital on 17 April 2016.
Speaking with The Independent they, said: “It’s not acceptable to receive that email on a Friday afternoon, just like so many we were so angry, confused and just felt completely deceived. How could they do that? And considering most of us have got some form of post traumatic stress disorder or depression, this is not a trauma based approach to that.
“You know, we’ve had an absolutely horrific weekend, just with other families parents completely falling apart.”
The couple called for NHS England to set out what appointment process was carried out prior to choosing Ms Dent and how many candidates were interviewed.
The Nottingham review, dubbed an “independent thematic review”, was launched in July 2021 and is being led by local NHS commissioners and NHS England.
It was announced after The Independent and Channel 4 revealed millions had been paid out by the trust over 30 baby deaths and 46 incidents of babies left permanently brain damaged by Nottingham University Hospitals Foundation Trust.
In a statement responding to NHS England’s letter the families said on Monday: “Families received an email from the current review team and NSHEI late on Friday afternoon [22nd April 2022]. This has caused a great deal of distress, and has left families feeling severely let down, confused, and further traumatised.
“Families were not consulted prior to any decisions being made about the “urgent changes to how the review is being delivered” which again demonstrates a lack of willingness to properly engage with the families affected and is at odds with what is needed from a truly independent review.
“In fact, since we went public with our grave concerns over the current review - nearly 3 weeks ago - not one person from NUH, the CCG nor NHSEI has been in contact with us.”
The statement added that families had “serious misgivings” about the process and choice of chair, Julie Dent.
It said: “We would urge Julie Dent to strongly consider her appointment. Families request she declines the offer of chair.”
“We welcome the offer by the Secretary of State to meet with him and look forward to discussing issues around poor maternity care in Nottinghamshire and the need for a truly independent review that can produce the real and impactful intervention that is required if families are to be safeguarded.”
The Independent has asked NHS England to set out what its appointment process was and whether this included contacting and considering Donna Ockenden for the post of chair. However it did not answer the questions.
In a statement it said: “No one should have to go through what these families in Nottingham have suffered and it is absolutely right that they have their experiences of poor care responded to and learned from. The next steps of the review including engagement with families will be set out shortly.”
