A woman whose father passed away shortly after an operation has spoken publicly following an inquest that identified what were described as catastrophic shortcomings in his medical care.
Arthur Brooke Craig, who was 77 years old and lived in Brighton, lost his life on June 26, 2024, several days after a senior colorectal surgeon performed an operation to remove a tumour from his abdomen at the Royal Sussex County Hospital.
Proceedings held at Horsham were told that during the procedure, the surgeon Marc Lamah opted to excise the patient’s colon rather than proceed with a minimally invasive technique.
The inquiry established that no second opinion was sought, the possibility of such a significant change to the surgical approach had not been communicated to the patient in advance, and the medical documentation had not been reviewed comprehensively beforehand.
The inquest also heard that Mr Craig underwent surgery despite suffering from a serious cardiac condition that went undetected by medical personnel, and that his fluid balance was not adequately observed following the operation.
Coroner Gareth Jones delivered his findings and characterised the oversight of Mr Craig’s heart problem as deeply concerning.
The coroner stated that such a fundamental lapse was difficult to comprehend.
After the hearing concluded, the deceased’s daughter, Professor Cathy Craig, described how her family had articulated serious objections regarding the standard of treatment her father received at the establishment.
She explained that the coroner had validated many of those concerns through his conclusions.
She highlighted specific failures, including the absence of proper disclosure regarding alternative treatment approaches and associated dangers, the failure to evaluate her father’s existing medical conditions, and the severe inadequacy in fluid replacement after a major surgical intervention.
Professor Craig noted that her father’s final request had been to understand what had occurred during his hospital stay, and she expressed that some clarity had finally been obtained through this process.
She also expressed gratitude toward the coroner for his thorough and considerate conduct of the proceedings and toward her legal representatives for their support throughout.
Representing the family, Camilla Browne from the Leigh Day legal practice addressed the court.
She observed that the inquest had exposed multiple systematic issues at the hospital.
She summarised that the coroner had accepted there was compelling evidence Mr Craig would not have consented to the extensive operation had he been fully informed of his choices.
The legal representative further noted that the coroner had determined that with appropriate guidance, the patient would probably have survived.
Additionally, the inquiry identified deficiencies in post-operative management.
While acknowledging that nothing could undo what had occurred or alleviate the family’s suffering, she expressed hope that the findings might at least provide some resolution for those affected.
She stated that she earnestly anticipated that meaningful improvements would be implemented by staff at the establishment to prevent other families from experiencing similar distress.
The coroner issued a narrative verdict and directed the NHS Trust to submit a response within 28 days detailing any modifications made to its patient consent procedures.