The government’s policy on care homes in England at the beginning of the Covid pandemic was declared illegal, which is a serious blow to the claims of ministers that they have thrown a “protective ring” around vulnerable people.
The Supreme Court’s decision was requested by two grieving daughters, Dr. Katie Gardner and Faye Harris, who lost their fathers to the virus in nursing homes in the spring of 2020. Michael Gibson died at the age of 88 in Oxfordshire on April 3, 2020. while Don Harris died at the age of 89 in Hampshire on May 1, 2020, both after outbreaks in their care homes.
More than a quarter of all deaths in nursing homes in March and April 2020 were related to Covid-19 – more than 12,500 people. Lawyers for 60-year-old Gardner and 58-year-old Harris say in a court review that the government did the exact opposite of then-Health Secretary Matt Hancock’s claim that “from the beginning we tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes.” ”.
After nearly 22 months of litigation challenging the legality of policies put forward by the health secretary, Public Health England and NHS England, the verdict was handed down Wednesday.
Lord Judge Bean and Mr Garnum said: “The decisions of the Secretary of State for Health and Welfare to draw up and maintain a series of policies contained in documents issued on 17 and 19 March and 2 April 2020 were illegal because the authors of these documents shall not take into account the risk of asymptomatic transmission to the elderly and vulnerable. “
As ministers and officials have demanded that vacancies be vacated by discharging 25,000 hospital patients in nursing homes, government guidelines issued on April 2, 2020, say no negative tests are needed before relocation.
The daughters argued that the failure to protect caregivers was one of the most unpleasant and devastating failures of politics in the modern era.
During the court proceedings, government lawyers denied any policy failures and told the court that scientists did not advise “hard evidence” of asymptomatic transmission until mid-April 2020. They said fears of hospital overload were far from theoretical ”and that ministers need to balance competing harms amid huge challenges.
Judges said the risk of asymptomatic transmission was highlighted by people, including Sir Patrick Valance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, in a radio interview on March 13.
“Asymptomatic transmission would mean that an adult patient transferred from a hospital to a nursing home could infect other occupants before or even without symptoms,” they said.
“Judges have found it irrational for the DHSC not to advise until mid-April 2020 that when an asymptomatic patient (other than a Covid-19 negative) is admitted to a care home, he or she should: as far as it is possible to be separated from other inhabitants for 14 days. ”
The Court rejected other aspects of the plaintiffs’ case, including actions under Articles 2 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and an action against NHS England.
Add Comment