Five chemotherapy bungle victims accept $100,000 compensation offer

FIVE victims of the chemotherapy bungle have accepted a “too little, too late” $100,000 compensation offer today because they could not face prolonged litigation.

Patient and spokesman for five of the families, Andrew Knox.

• Insurer sticks to $100K chemo bungle compo offer, five accept deal
• Chemo bungle compo to be rushed through, Jack Snelling says

FIVE victims of the chemotherapy bungle accepted a “too little, too late” $100,000 compensation offer today because they could not face prolonged litigation.

“We are too tired, too sick or deceased. We have no choice but to accept the offer that has been given to us,” victim Andew Knox said.

Mr Knox called for a Royal Commission or judicial inquiry, saying the compensation chapter was closed but public safety of the health system could not be guaranteed.

“I think the RC should clearly be on the misuse of the safety system within the SA public hospital system,” he said.

He called on members of the public to email the Premier, Jay Weatherill, calling for an inquiry.

Speaker Michael Atkinson today considered whether Mr Weatherill misled State Parliament over statements regarding legal advice to patients caught up in the chemotherapy bungle.

In a ruling before Question Time this afternoon, Mr Atkinson said the Liberals had not made out a case that the comments were either incorrect or deliberately misleading.

He said the Liberals should provide further evidence if they have it and cleared Mr Weatherill of misleading Parliament.

During Question Time yesterday Mr Weatherill said the Government always intended to pay for patients’ compensation legal advice.

“That would be part of the settlement that would be reached in relation to this matter, and that is certainty the approach we have taken,” he said.

However, The Advertiser revealed today that the first patient to relapse after the bungle, a man who has since died, was given a minor $18,000 settlement last year from the RAH for which he had to pay his own legal costs.

In Parliament this morning Deputy Opposition leader Vickie Chapman referred to the report and said: “This disclosure is in direct contradiction of the Premier’s claim of how the state operates in respect of compensation claims and where a settlement is paid.”

“I believe that ... the Premier, has knowingly and deliberately misled this house and abused the privileges of this house.”

Mr Weatherill said on radio this morning that he had not misled parliament.

“It was our expectation after sending somebody off to get legal advice that when they formulated their claim it’s absolutely routine that people formulate the claim X plus legal costs,” he said.

Ms Chapman told advertiser.com.au she believed the Premier’s statements were inconsistent with those of the victims and their relatives.

“We are concerned that the Premier may have misled the Parliament and victims of the chemotherapy dosing scandal,” she said.

“That’s why I have asked the Speaker to rule on whether the Premier misled the Parliament yesterday. Premier Weatherill’s claims just don’t add up.”

The family of the first patient to relapse after the chemotherapy bungle had its compensation from the Government cut by $18,000 because of the minor RAH settlement.

As anger grows over the handling of compensation in the underdosing scandal, it is understood the $100,000 offer made to them on Monday was reduced to $82,000.

One member of the family described the reduction as “harsh” after what they had been through, particularly as they had to pay their own legal costs.

The man, who was in his sixties, and his wife were both paid $9000 after protracted negotiations with the hospital, which had admitted providing only half the recommended dose of the chemotherapy drug Cytarabine.

The man’s wife died unexpectedly in May of a heart attack following routine surgery.

Other victims say they have felt pressured to accept the Government’s offer, or risk getting nothing for the mistake, revealed by The Advertiser almost a year ago.

Mr Weatherill admitted this morning there had been a “cover up”.

He said he was given assurances the matter was being handled after “the bungle occurred, after the cover up occurred”.

Mr Weatherill said on Wednesday that he had learnt “to his horror” last week that compensation for the victims had been dragging on.

His intervention provoked the offer from the Government’s insurers, SAICORP, which went to the victims’ families on Monday.

“I asked them to make a substantial offer,” Mr Weatherill said.

A spokesman for five of the families, patient Andrew Knox, on Wednesday said that “I think the whole way this has been handled is disgraceful and defective”.

Critically ill underdosing victim Bronte Higham.

Mr Knox said he and four other families were being forced to accept the Government’s $100,000 offer after it refused to budge in negotiations.

“We are in an impossible situation — either accept, or put our surviving families through the continuing hell of litigation,” he said.

“The Premier knows we are too weak to contest the value he set upon our lives and our families’ suffering.”

Speaking this morning, Mr Knox said it was not the size of the compensation that was the most upsetting, it was the Government’s conduct.

“Our lives are worth nothing to the Premier. I don’t know where his conscience is,” Mr Knox told FIVEaa.

“They (the Government) have got to go.”

Mr Weatherill said he would be happy to speak to Mr Knox if that would be of some “comfort”.

The Government on Wednesday refused to raise Monday’s $100,000 compensation offer.

Five families sought through a lawyer to raise it by tens of thousands of dollars after receiving advice it was deficient but were told on Wednesday the offer was final.

Mr Knox will reluctantly sign his acceptance at Parliament House on Thursday in front of the media.

Ricki Higham, the wife of dying victim Bronte Higham, is also expected to attend and sign.

Mr Higham, who is seriously ill, is recovering from an infection in the FMC.

Mr Higham’s testimony to a parliamentary committee brought about the Government’s change of heart.

In another recent development, victims of the BreastScreen SA failure to detect breast cancer in 72 women between 2010-12 will now be included in a select committee inquiry into the chemotherapy underdosing scandal.

Opposition health spokesman Stephen Wade on Wednesday called on the Government to make fair and unconditional offers of compensation to these victims as well.

“The Weatherill Government only made offers to the chemotherapy victims after the victims went public with their stories and appeared before a parliamentary inquiry,” he said.

Mr Weatherill said there were “no ‘take it or leave it’ offers made”.

“There has simply been a substantial offer, as I understand it, made to each of the litigants,” he told Parliament.

Mr Knox said SAICORP came back an hour later to say it would not negotiate and that they should “take it or leave it”.

“I would call that playing hard ball,” he said. He also rejected Mr Weatherill’s claim that the Government always intended to pay the legal costs of the chemotherapy victims.

Instructions from SAICORP sent to Mr Knox and Mr Higham show this was not the case, and SAICORP in April suggested they contact the Law Society for help.

“They may be able to assist you in finding a lawyer who would accept your case without any or minimal initial cost,” SAICORP told them.

Mr Knox said Mr Weatherill had been misled.

“Legal expenses were never offered nor mentioned,” Mr Knox said.

“It was only following the distress of Ricki and Bronte Higham that the Premier decided to intervene, some 15 months late.”

But Mr Weatherill told ABC radio this morning that it was common place for the Government to cover legal fees and that any lawyer in Adelaide would have told the claimants that in their first interview.

“There’s no lawyer in Adelaide that would send a letter of claim to the Government that wouldn’t include a claim plus legal costs. If that wasn’t made clear ... then that’s unfortunate,” he said.

Opposition leader Steven Marshall has called for an independent judicial review into the matter.