Dozens of families who suffered traumatic losses and medical complications have begun sharing their testimony as a high-profile independent investigation into maternity and neonatal care across Sussex officially moves into its public phase. The review, led by senior midwife and safety expert Donna Ockenden, aims to scrutinize more than 1,000 cases of alleged medical negligence and systemic failure within the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust.
The formal launch of the inquiry followed a public meeting in Brighton, where bereaved parents and healthcare advocates gathered to establish the terms of reference for the investigation. This review was commissioned after a sustained campaign by families who believe their children died or suffered permanent disabilities due to preventable errors and a culture of dismissal within the regional healthcare system.
Among those scheduled to provide testimony is Susan Cacciacarro, whose experience has become a focal point for the campaign for accountability. In 2021, Cacciacarro was nearly 37 weeks pregnant with her daughter, Chiara, when she realized the baby had stopped moving. Despite being classified as a high-risk pregnancy due to a previously diagnosed heart condition, Cacciacarro alleges that hospital staff failed to act on critical warning signs in the weeks leading up to the stillbirth.
The Human Cost of Maternity Failures in Sussex
The personal accounts of families like the Cacciacarros highlight what many advocates describe as a pattern of clinical oversight at Worthing Hospital and other facilities managed by the University Hospitals Sussex trust. During a 34-week scan, medical records indicated that Chiara had lost weight, a significant red flag in a high-risk pregnancy. However, maternity staff did not expedite the birth or adjust the care plan, which had scheduled a delivery for the 39th week.
When Cacciacarro arrived at the hospital after noticing a lack of fetal movement, staff were unable to detect a heartbeat. The subsequent stillbirth of her first child left her devastated, a sentiment shared by hundreds of other parents in the region who feel their concerns were ignored by medical professionals. Cacciacarro has described the experience as a total collapse of her world, emphasizing that the review must provide answers for families who feel "robbed" of their children’s futures.
The emotional weight of these testimonies is expected to drive the narrative of the review. For many bereaved parents to give evidence at independent review of Sussex maternity services, the process is not merely about finding fault but about ensuring that no other family endures similar preventable tragedies. The inquiry will look closely at whether clinical protocols were followed and if there was a systemic failure to listen to the intuition and observations of expectant mothers.
Investigating a Pattern of Avoidable Harm
The impetus for this independent review grew significantly following a joint media investigation earlier this year. Reports from the BBC and the New Statesman suggested that at least 55 baby deaths within the University Hospitals Sussex trust could have been avoided if the mothers had received a standard level of care. These findings suggested that the issues were not isolated incidents but part of a broader institutional failure.
Donna Ockenden was selected to lead the Sussex inquiry due to her extensive track record in uncovering maternity scandals across the United Kingdom. She previously chaired the landmark review into the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, which identified hundreds of avoidable deaths and injuries over a two-year period. She is also currently overseeing similar large-scale investigations in Nottingham and Leeds.
The Sussex review is expected to be exhaustive, covering cases dating back to 2018. The scope includes not only stillbirths and neonatal deaths but also cases where mothers or infants suffered life-altering injuries during labor and delivery. By examining over 1,000 cases, the Ockenden team hopes to identify recurring themes, such as staffing shortages, inadequate training, and a lack of transparency when things go wrong.
Structural Challenges Within the NHS Maternity System
The independent review comes at a time of heightened scrutiny for the National Health Service (NHS) maternity units. Across the country, several trusts have been rated as "inadequate" by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the independent regulator of health and social care in England. Common themes across these failing units include a "toxic" workplace culture, a failure to escalate clinical concerns to senior doctors, and an over-emphasis on "natural births" even when medical intervention is clearly necessary.
In Sussex, the "Truth for Our Babies" (TFOB) campaign group has been instrumental in bringing these issues to the national stage. The group, comprised of bereaved parents to give evidence at independent review of Sussex maternity services, has argued that the trust’s management was often defensive rather than reflective when faced with complaints. This perceived lack of candor has been a major hurdle for families seeking closure.
The Ockenden review will specifically look at the "duty of candor," a legal requirement for healthcare providers to be open and honest with patients when something goes wrong. Families have alleged that they were often given conflicting information about the cause of their children’s deaths, or that internal investigations were biased in favor of protecting the hospital’s reputation.
The Role of Donna Ockenden and the Inquiry Team
During the launch event in Brighton, Donna Ockenden emphasized her commitment to a "family-first" approach. She stated that her priority is to listen to those who have been harmed and to ensure that the voices of "seldom-heard" communities—including ethnic minorities and lower-income families who often face worse maternal outcomes—are central to the findings.
The review team will consist of independent clinical experts, including midwives, obstetricians, and neonatologists, who have no prior connection to the Sussex trust. This independence is seen as vital for regaining public trust. The team will analyze medical records, interview current and former staff, and hold private sessions with families to build a comprehensive picture of the trust’s performance over the last six years.
Ockenden has noted that the review will not wait until its final report to recommend changes. If immediate safety concerns are identified during the evidence-gathering phase, the trust will be required to implement corrective measures immediately. This "rolling" approach to safety improvements is designed to protect current and future patients while the long-term investigation continues.
Institutional and Political Responses
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust has publicly welcomed the review, acknowledging the pain of the families involved. Dr. Andy Heeps, the trust’s chief executive, issued a statement expressing sympathy for the bereaved parents and affirming the organization’s commitment to the investigative process. Heeps noted that the maternity teams have already implemented several changes in recent years aimed at improving safety and communication.
However, for many families, these assurances come too late. The Department of Health and Social Care has also weighed in, noting that the national government is investing in maternity safety and wider reforms following previous Ockenden reports. A spokesperson for the department stated that the goal is to ensure "consistent and compassionate care" across all NHS maternity services.
The political stakes are high, as the findings of the Sussex review could influence national policy regarding how maternity units are funded, staffed, and monitored. There is growing pressure on the government to mandate minimum staffing levels and to reform the way medical negligence claims are handled to prioritize learning over litigation.
Looking Toward Accountability and Reform
As the bereaved parents to give evidence at independent review of Sussex maternity services begin their testimony, the focus remains on the dual goals of accountability and systemic reform. For Susan Cacciacarro and the members of Truth for Our Babies, the review represents a long-overdue opportunity to have their experiences validated by an impartial body.
The final report, which is expected to take several months to compile given the volume of cases, will likely provide a detailed roadmap for how the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust can rebuild its maternity services. It will also serve as a stark reminder of the human cost of clinical negligence and the importance of a healthcare culture that prioritizes patient safety above institutional ego.
The eyes of the healthcare community and the public remain on Sussex as this review unfolds. The outcome will not only determine the future of maternity care in this specific region but will also contribute to a national conversation about the urgent need for a safer, more transparent NHS. For the families involved, the hope is that their participation will ensure that the tragedies of the past are never repeated for the mothers and babies of the future.
