Patients who were prescribed Primodos feel let down and betrayed after not being included in a report addressing health scandals.

Patients who were prescribed Primodos feel let down and betrayed after not being included in a report addressing health scandals.

Activists have alleged that the UK government has deceived them, following a reassessment of compensation for individuals harmed by health crises that disregards families potentially impacted by the Primodos pregnancy test hormone.

On Wednesday, a report was released by Dr. Henrietta Hughes, the patient safety commissioner. The report states that thousands of women and children who were harmed by the epilepsy medication sodium valproate and vaginal mesh implants should receive compensation for the avoidable harm they experienced.

Although the commissioner wished to incorporate families impacted by hormone pregnancy tests in her assessment, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) informed her that they would not be involved.

Between the 1950s and 70s, Primodos was a type of oral medication that regulated menstrual cycles and could also be used as a pregnancy test. However, hormone pregnancy tests were discontinued in the late 1970s due to concerns that they may have caused birth defects and miscarriages. Recently, a case brought by over 100 families seeking legal compensation was dismissed by the high court due to lack of new evidence.

The Hughes report mentions that their guidelines did not cover the topic of hormone pregnancy tests. This was a choice made by DHSC and should not be seen as reflecting the commissioner’s stance on the preventable harm caused by hormone pregnancy tests or the steps needed to resolve this issue.

The patient safety commissioner originally requested their inclusion in the scope, but ultimately agreed to complete the work as outlined by DHSC ministers.

According to Marie Lyon, the head of the Association For Children Affected by Hormone Pregnancy Tests, the families of those who used these tests feel neglected and let down by not being involved in the patient safety commissioner’s examination.

I feel let down by the patient safety commissioner, the IMMDS review, and the secretary of state for health. They have all let our families down by neglecting us. It seems they have decided to only focus on valproate and mesh because it’s easier, instead of addressing our concerns.

Since 1978, the charity has been contacted by approximately 1,200 families, according to Lyon. Numerous individuals reported that their doctor did not inform them about the potential dangers of Primodos, which is 40 times more potent than a regular birth control pill.

She stated that our families do not receive any aid in caring for their children or financial assistance for necessary medication and equipment to prevent physical and mental health decline.

Yasmin Qureshi, a member of the Labour Party and an advocate for this cause, expressed disappointment in the government’s decision to exclude families affected by Primodos from the report.

“Several individuals who deserve compensation are running out of time and cannot afford to wait for the government to take action. They are in urgent need of financial assistance.”

According to the commissioner’s findings, approximately 10,000 women have suffered severe consequences from pelvic mesh, and in England alone, around 14,000 children may never achieve independence due to exposure to sodium valproate in the womb from 1973 to 2017.

The ingestion of sodium valproate during pregnancy has been associated with physical deformities, autism, and developmental delays in certain children, who were being treated for epilepsy by their mothers.

Some women have experienced severe harm as a result of using vaginal mesh implants to treat urinary and gynecological conditions.

The report from the commissioner states that due to widespread failures in healthcare and regulation, the government must establish a two-part financial compensation program.

A preliminary installment of £25,000 would be succeeded by a primary plan with disbursements determined by the specific requirements of each recipient.

However, while Hughes recognized that families throughout the UK were affected by vaginal mesh and valproate, she stated that her legal responsibility only allowed for addressing compensation for victims in England.