Dr Kevin Naylor represents women left permanently injured by mesh implant surgery

August 4, 2020

Dr Kevin Naylor from Exchange Chambers is instructed by Thompsons Solicitors on behalf of women left permanently injured by mesh implant surgery.

Many of Thompsons’ clients were not adequately informed of the risks of the surgery, and many were never told of other far less invasive options available, such as physiotherapy or bulking injections. Some were even assured that mesh wasn’t being used at all.

Linda Millband, national clinical negligence lead at Thompsons Solicitors, said:

“All of those we represent have suffered unimaginable pain from mesh, physically and emotionally. Many have seen their marriages and relationships break under the strain, not to mention the constant pain they’re in.

“Incorrectly inserted mesh implants is one of the biggest UK health scandals since Thalidomide. Mesh was promised as a ‘wonder solution’ to many health concerns, especially for women, but those we represent had little to no understanding of what they were agreeing to when they said yes to surgical intervention. They have been left with permanent injuries that have affected their work and relationships, and inflicted psychological trauma.”

For years, people have campaigned against the use of mesh implants.

In February 2018, Baroness Cumberlege was asked by the government to carry out an independent review of medical interventions, including surgical mesh, and her Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review was published on 8 July.  As part of her recommendations, Baroness Cumberlege urged the Government to ‘immediately issue a fulsome apology on behalf of the healthcare system to those families affected’.

Commenting on the report, Dr Kevin Naylor said:

“Now that the terrible suffering endured by these women has been officially recognised, it is time for those responsible to act constructively and compensate the victims fairly.”

Added Linda Millband:

“Baroness Cumberlege’s recommendations offer the possibility of real reform, but it must be swift, real and properly resourced, with ‘new’ money not taken from already committed funds.”