17 January 2023: Closing Statements, Steven Snowden KC - B

Mr Snowden returned by listing various myths and lies promulgated within the Contaminated Blood Scandal. These included: that the situation was ”unavoidable”; that concentrates were “essential”, and “haemophiliacs will die”; that patients did not want to go back to cryoprecipitate; that the patients knew there were risks; that there was “no conclusive proof” of AIDS being transmitted by blood; that the risks were known among patients; that there would not have been enough donors; that compensation could not be paid because there was no legal liability; that the HIV Litigation fully compensated people; that during the Inquiry the Government had been supporting everyone infected and affected; and, that the science was always evolving (even though some which is still used came from as far back as 1946).

 

Some of these myths and lies were simply left as listed since they were described in the submission. A few were pursued, such as some comments being made about the matter of pool sizes. It was also noted that hepatitis risks from blood use were recognised at least from 1974. While still not having its own formal name, a lot was known about Non-A/Non-B Hepatitis, even by medical students, including its fatality. Cryo was not the undesirable product it was made out to be, including for home-treatment. The situation in Finland was given as an example of what could have happened. Mr Snowden saw it as critical that the constant assertions against cryo were a major factor in what would so drastically follow for patients.

 

(At this point Mr Snowden handed over to his colleague, Mr Cummings, who would focus on the Treloar College matters.) By way of introduction, Mr Cummings expressed the gratitude of core participants to Sir Brian, Jenni, and the others of the Inquiry team. This prompted a round of spontaneous applause from those in attendance. Thanks were also expressed to fellow core participants, support bodies, and recognised legal representatives.

 

There was a brief summary of the establishment and purpose for establishing such a unique institution as Treloar College. It provided a mix of mainstream education and specialist practical classes and activities. A key group of students were the haemophiliac boys with the on-site haemophilia treatment facility being crucial to the arrangement working. Like the concentrates being administered there, Treloar College was presented as an exceptional opportunity which advanced the care of haemophiliacs. Mr Cummings quoted Shakespeare with, “All that glistens is not gold”. Both the concentrates and Treloar College appeared as gold – but were they? (Incidentally, this writer has a vague memory of being told the actual word should be “glisters”.) The example was given of a pro-active letter being sent to invite a boy to the school. In hindsight, the parents wondered if their son was targeted for purposes which had nothing to do with education of children.

 

Mr Cummings adopted the pattern set by his colleague, Mr Snowden, in applying a set of questions to the specific case of Treloar College. These included matters such as informed consent, research dressed up as treatment, abdication of responsibility, compounded paternalism, betrayals of trust, survivor guilt (“you’re the lucky one, you’re still alive”); and, the mental and emotional consequences embedded from childhood and adolescence. Specific recognition was given to the concept of “in loco parentis”. The school cannot wash its hands of responsibility by pointing to the doctors and nurses. It had a duty of care to the pupils not only for their teaching but also for their safety and wellbeing. School staff had a written agreement to act on behalf of parents, yet they did not attend medical appointments in the normal way that parents would. Attending parents would be expected to ask questions so as to understand and monitor the treatments being provided to their proxy charges. (There followed a quite detailed consideration of internal Treloar College documents to present the case for accusing the college of a dereliction of duty. Such an approach was not anticipated to be part of the closing statement process, but perhaps there was an eye on the impending court action related to Treloar College.)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

26 July 2023: Sunak - A

And in walked the Prime Minister (PM), at exactly 2pm. One minute later the Chair enters. Sir Brian said a few words of thanks for the special circumstances related to access people had to endure due to the additional security arrangements. The PM gave the oath following his own religious affiliation. Counsel contextually reviewed how the witness had stated that his knowledge and involvement relied on other Ministers, however he had received more recent briefings in preparation for the appearance today. The first questions went straight to the communications from Penny Mordaunt when she was Paymaster General (PG). These highlighted in strong terms the need for action at the time and not to delay. Before answering, the witness wanted to say how he recognised this was, “An appalling scandal … people have suffered for decades” (and other fine words not backed up with action). In relation to the letters from the PG, he did not see them under the normal situation of a triage to filter the c...
Read more

25 July 2023: Dunn - B

Questions from core participants: Was there an investigation into the newspaper leaks? She was not aware of one, but that would have been taken forward by the Cabinet Office. (Fox and chicken coop comes to mind.) What are the main elements being used to come up with the leaked figures? She was not able to say but would get back to the Inquiry with that information. On psychological support, will the research be made publicly available, and when? She expected it would be and was expected in August. The research was understood to have been commissioned in 2022, but the need was highlighted in 2020. Why did it take so long to get to the point of commissioning the work? She said there was a process of “ongoing dialogue” after which it was decided that what was required was more ongoing dialogue. (That’s not exactly how it was phrased.) The Chair referenced himself as having, on several occasions, expressed the hope that he can recognise how everyone in the UK, including England, was benefi...
Read more

17 November 2022: Panel on finding the undiagnosed - A

Another panel of leading medics were assembled to address the issue of how to find people who are still undiagnosed. There was one from each of the four nations: Professor Graham Foster (England); Professor John Dillon (Scotland); Doctor Brendan Healey (Wales); and Dr Joanne McLean (Northern Ireland). As usual, for each witness there was a brief review of their respective roles and responsibilities. The situation in England started with a description of the HCV elimination initiative and its arrangement involving the pharmaceutical companies which was lauded by the English witness but seemed curious. For their cooperation, the pharma companies get anonymous, headline data on patients. There is a three phase elimination programme in England. Phase 1 is about oral therapies. Phase 2 is about risk groups. It involves an incentivised process to encourage the identification by re-engagement with patients who had had a positive test but had not been treated. It involved about 50,000 people. ...
Read more