Ockenden Report 2026: What It Means for NUH Maternity Families

On 24th June 2026, the Ockenden report into maternity services at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (“NUH”) will be published. For thousands of families, this is not an abstract event or a news story. It is the moment they find out, formally and officially, what happened to them – and in many cases, what was done, said, or withheld without their knowledge.

At the centre of this report are families: families who have been waiting years, some more than a decade, for acknowledgement of what they experienced; families who have raised children with profound disabilities, or who have lived with the loss of a baby or a mother, while fighting for answers that should have been given to them long ago. Whatever the report says, it will not undo the harm that was done. But for many families it will represent the first time that harm has been formally recognised by an official process. That matters enormously.

I have worked with families affected by birth injury and clinical negligence throughout my career, across England and Wales. I cannot begin to understand how much this moment means to families but I do know that further support will be needed – legally, practically, and emotionally. This article sets out what families need to know before the report is published, and what their options may be in the weeks and months that follow.

What the Ockenden review is

The review was established in May 2022, led by Donna Ockenden, a senior and highly experienced midwife who was the families’ own choice to lead it. Many families affected by the maternity care at NUH had fought for years to be heard, and fought specifically to have an independent figure they could trust appointed to chair the process.

Independence matters deeply. Many families who have been through experiences like these lose trust in the medical profession – understandably so, given what they have faced. Having someone independent, with no connection to the institution under review, has been central to families feeling able to engage with the process at all.

Donna Ockenden previously led the review into maternity services at Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, which found that more than 200 babies and nine mothers could have survived with better care. That review set the standard for what a serious, independent inquiry into maternity failings should look like.

The Nottingham review covers maternity services at Nottingham City Hospital and Queen’s Medical Centre, both run by NUH. It is the largest review of a single NHS service in this country’s history, covering 2,505 cases including stillbirths, neonatal deaths, significant brain injuries to babies, severe maternal harm and maternal deaths. The cases span more than twenty years. New families were added to the review until the doors closed in May 2025, which is itself a deeply troubling indicator: the harm did not stop when the review began.

What happens on and after 24th June

The report will be published on 24th June and will be livestreamed. Families have been invited to meetings with Donna Ockenden on 22nd and 23rd June to discuss the findings ahead of publication.

Following publication, around 2,500 families will receive individualised written feedback. These reports will be released in batches of approximately 250 through July, August and into September 2026. Each family’s report will carry a grading:

0: the standard of care provided was adequate
1: better care might have made a difference to the outcome
2: care was substandard

Families where there has been a maternal death will be offered a face-to-face meeting in Nottingham regardless of their grading.

A five-month support window runs from the date of publication until November or early December 2026. Throughout this period, families can contact the review team directly at nottsreview@donnaockenden.com. Psychological support is available, including in side rooms, during the family meetings themselves.

I want to say something honestly about this process. However well prepared families feel, receiving a formal written report about what happened during the most vulnerable moments of their lives is going to be painful. It may bring back memories, emotions and questions that families have spent years trying to manage.

The grading system provides a framework, but it cannot fully capture the complexity of what individual families have been through, or answer every question they have carried. Many families will also be asking, rightly, what changes will actually follow from this report – and whether the culture that allowed this harm to continue for over two decades will genuinely change.

Those are questions the review itself cannot fully answer. They are questions that must now be directed at NUH, at NHS England, and at the government.

What the review has already confirmed

Before the final report is published, a great deal is already on the public record – and it is important that families know this.

Donna Ockenden has stated publicly during the review period that she has repeatedly heard accounts of cover-ups to hide failings, staff shortages, problems with training, dismissive attitudes towards families, bullying, and discrimination. These are not allegations made by families in isolation. They are observations made by the review chair herself, based on the evidence gathered from thousands of cases.

In February 2025, NUH pleaded guilty to six charges of failing to provide safe care and treatment in relation to three mothers and their babies. The trust was ordered to pay £1,667,944 – the largest maternity-related financial penalty ever imposed on an NHS trust.

Nottinghamshire Police launched Operation Perth in 2024. In June 2025, this was formally escalated to a corporate manslaughter investigation, with police explicitly examining whether NUH as an organisation bears responsibility for deaths and serious injuries in its maternity services. As of early 2026, investigators had reviewed 232 of 360 family folders referred to them by the Ockenden team, and are consulting the Crown Prosecution Service on a number of cases.

These findings reflect what I have witnessed throughout my career, across the country, in case after case. The same failures recur: induction of mismanaged labour; foetal distress not recognised or acted upon quickly enough; midwives stretched across too many patients to give each one the care they need; and junior staff left feeling unable to raise concerns, even when something is clearly wrong.

Families come to me not because compensation is what they wanted – they wanted a healthy baby and a healthy mother – but because the hospital Trust that should have given them answers gave them silence instead, and they had nowhere else to turn.

What this is like to live through

The facts and figures of the Ockenden review tell one part of the story. The human reality is another.

Families describe not being believed as one of the most damaging parts of their experience – not just the original harm, but the years of dismissal that followed. Concerns raised and ignored. Notes that did not reflect what was actually said in appointments. Injuries attributed to other causes without adequate investigation, while families were left to fight alone for answers.

Many families have read their medical records for the first time during this process and found things that contradict what they were told at the time. Some have found evidence of decisions that were never communicated to them at all. Reading those records can be profoundly retraumatising – and yet it is also, for many, the moment when they finally understand that what they experienced was real, that their instincts were right, and that they were not to blame.

One family we spoke to recently, in the course of our work with Ockenden families, asked a question I have not been able to stop thinking about: “Why are parents of harmed children having to fight so hard?”

It is a question the report must help to answer. And it is a question that must produce real change – not just acknowledgement, but action.

There is something else I want to acknowledge. Within the Ockenden review there are bereaved families – parents whose babies or whose partners did not survive – and there are families raising children with serious, lifelong disabilities. These two groups are bound together by this process, and many families in both situations have told us they feel a complicated guilt: grief for what they have lost alongside awareness of others’ different losses.

If you are experiencing that, you are not alone, and you are not wrong to feel it. Both experiences of harm are valid. Both deserve to be heard.

What this means legally – what families should know now

Not every case in the Ockenden review will give rise to a legal claim, and I want to say that clearly and honestly. But there are legal points that many families are not aware of, and some have been given advice by previous solicitors that does not reflect the full picture. Here is what I believe families should understand.

We cannot tell you immediately whether you have a claim – but we can tell you whether it is worth investigating. Decades of specialist experience mean we can identify whether there is sufficient merit to look further, particularly once we have access to medical records, complaint outcomes, Ockenden reports or Serious Untoward Incident Reports. In many cases, that investigation can proceed without the family having to pay our legal costs or expert evidence fees, if the evidence does not support a claim.

The causation test. It is not enough to show that something went wrong, or that the care fell below the expected standard. To recover compensation, we must also show, on the balance of probabilities, that the negligent care caused or materially contributed to the injury or loss. Where there are multiple possible causes of a child’s condition – including a co-existing genetic diagnosis – that does not automatically rule out a claim. Expert evidence is needed to identify the competing causes and to consider whether the negligent care made a material contribution to the outcome. However, if a child would have suffered some disability in any event, compensation can only be recovered for the additional injury, disability or loss caused by the negligence.

Wrongful birth. This is a cause of action that is frequently overlooked by non-specialists. It may arise where parents were not given information which, if known at the time, would have led them to make a different decision about continuing the pregnancy. In those cases, the claim is not that the negligence caused the child’s disability, but that the parents were deprived of the opportunity to make an informed choice. This is a sensitive and complex area of law that requires specialist handling.

If a previous solicitor told you there is no claim, that is not necessarily the end of the road. Over the course of my career I have acted for many clients who went on to secure significant compensation after being told elsewhere that their case had no merit. The quality of that advice depends on whether the person giving it had the right specialist experience. If you were seen by a general personal injury solicitor rather than a specialist in birth injury and clinical negligence, it can be worth seeking a second opinion . When choosing a specialist, it is worth checking whether they hold a recognised panel membership from the Law Society or AvMA, the specialist charity for patient safety. It is also worth considering what independent legal directories, including the Legal 500, say about their experience. These are meaningful indicators of genuine specialist expertise, rather than general personal injury practice alone.

Time limits. The rules are different for children. In most cases involving a child, the three-year limitation period does not start to run until their 18th birthday. Where a person lacks capacity, the position may be different again. For parents bringing a claim for wrongful birth, the three-year period runs from the child’s date of birth. For parents claiming for psychiatric injury, such as PTSD, the period can sometimes run from the date of knowledge – when they first knew, or could reasonably have known, that negligence may have caused their injury. However, limitation can be complex and disputed, so we always recommend treating the child’s date of birth as the safest starting point unless the facts clearly suggest otherwise. If you have any doubt about timing, take specialist advice now rather than waiting.

Records. Medical records are the foundation of any potential claim. Some families have found that records can go missing, or that evidence becomes harder to retrieve the longer it is left. We strongly recommend requesting your records as early as possible. If you have already received your Ockenden report, that document is also significant evidence. Do not wait.

Cerebral palsy and complex brain injury cases. These cases take many years to investigate properly. The earlier a family contacts a specialist, the sooner they can receive advice on the merits of the case, if a claim can be established, the sooner steps can be taken to seek interim financial support for the child during their most important developmental years. Early contact is not a commitment to pursue a claim. It is simply the best way to understand your options while time and evidence are on your side.

Cases outside the Ockenden review. Barratts is currently in contact with families in Nottingham and across the UK whose cases were not included in the review – either because they fell outside the period covered by the review, or because they were not identified or referred. Not being part of the Ockenden review does not mean a case has no merit. If you have concerns about maternity care at NUH, or at any other hospital Trust, it is worth seeking specialist advice regardless of whether your case is formally within the review’s scope.

The proposed government reforms. The government is currently considering reforms to clinical negligence compensation, including possible changes to the way future care and treatment are valued in compensation awards. I have serious concerns about what any restriction on claims for private care would mean for the most seriously injured children and their families, and I will be writing about this in detail separately. For now, the most important thing for families to know is that the current law applies to claims being investigated now. If you have concerns about your options, take advice under the current framework before any changes come into effect.

What to do if you are affected

If you are waiting for your individualised Ockenden report and want to understand what it might mean for your legal options, it may be worth speaking to a specialist clinical negligence solicitor before it arrives, or soon afterwards. Understanding the legal framework in advance can help you know what questions to ask when the report is received, and can avoid you making important decisions under the acute pressure of having just read something deeply painful.

If you have already received your grading and want to understand what it means in practical terms, we can help you think through what it indicates and whether it is worth investigating further.

If you were previously told you have no claim, please do not assume that is the final word.

When you contact Barratts, you will speak with a specialist in birth injury and clinical negligence from the outset. You will not be passed through a call centre where you might be talking to an administrator. Calling Barratts will mean you talk to someone with the knowledge and experience to understand your situation and give you an honest assessment of whether there is merit in looking further.

We cannot tell you in that first conversation whether you have a claim. But we can tell you whether your case is worth investigating, and we can do so with the benefit of decades of experience in exactly these cases.

Many families also tell us that one of the most frightening aspects of their situation is not knowing what will happen to their child if they are no longer there to fight for them. A successful clinical negligence claim, where one exists, can provide long-term financial security and genuine peace of mind about a child’s future. That security is not available to every family, but where a claim can be established, it is one of the most meaningful things the legal process can provide.

There is no pressure and no obligation in speaking with us. If you have questions about where you stand, contact Barratts to speak to a specialist and understand your options.

Call us on 0115 931 5171 or email me and I will come back to you promptly.

Alison Brooks is a Partner at Barratts and leads the firm’s clinical negligence practice. She has represented families in birth injury and clinical negligence cases for over 35 years, across England and Wales, including families currently supported through the Ockenden review into maternity services at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust.