More than 1,000 cases are expected to be investigated as part of a maternity review at a hospital trust, in a move welcomed by campaigners.
The investigation into University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust (UH Sussex) will look at cases dating back to 2018, including all harmed and bereaved families, unless they opt out.
The Truth for Our Babies group welcomed the “full and inclusive review” after spending years pushing for an inquiry “that reflects the scale of harm experienced due to failures in care”.
The group has previously said that more than 60 families in Sussex have been affected by maternity care failings.
Senior midwife and investigator Donna Ockenden has been announced to lead the review, a key request from the families when they met Health Secretary Wes Streeting in Brighton last month.
Of the review, the group said: “It gives us hope that families will finally receive the answers they have been seeking.
“We need to know what has failed, why so many families have been harmed and what immediate and then further and long-term actions will be taken to improve maternity safety for future parents and babies in Sussex.”
The Department of Health and Social Care confirmed the review will cover cases of stillbirth, neonatal death, maternal death, neonatal harm caused by severe brain injuries and severe maternal harm.
The department added that the vast majority of births in the NHS have good outcomes and women should continue to attend all maternity appointments and are encouraged to raise any concerns with staff without hesitation.
Mr Streeting said: “The families in Sussex who have campaigned so tirelessly for this review have shown extraordinary courage.
“The scope we have set out is deliberately broad and inclusive with all eligible cases included automatically unless families choose otherwise.
“Donna Ockenden has already shown, time and again, that she has the expertise and confidence of the families to lead a thorough review and I have every confidence she will do the same in Sussex.”
In chairing the independent review, Ms Ockenden will have the power to consider cases from before 2018 and cases where women believe they meet the criteria of severe harm but have incomplete or missing records.
Anita Jewitt, head of medical negligence at law firm Stewarts, said that the opt-out approach was hugely significant but added that clarity around the scope was “crucial”.
She said: “While automatically including families from 2018 onwards will capture a substantial body of evidence, it’s equally important that families whose experiences fall outside that period are clearly encouraged and supported to opt in.
“Meaningful learning depends on ensuring that all voices who wish to be heard are able to come forward.”
Full terms of reference will be decided in the coming months.
Ms Ockenden said: “It’s a privilege to have the trust of so many families across Sussex.
“Family voices will run through the heart of the review. Their perspective is essential in ensuring that the review is fully inclusive and reflective of their experiences (what has happened to them) and meets their needs.
“Together with families, we will develop the terms of reference of the review to make sure that all families have the opportunity for their voice to be heard – especially disadvantaged, seldom heard and global majority families.”
norwich nhs baby deaths investigation +4 As of mid-2026, investigations and inquests into maternity care in Norfolk have highlighted significant concerns, primarily focusing on missed opportunities and communication failures in cases at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital and James Paget Hospital.Key Developments and Investigations:Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (NNUH): An inquest in late 2024 examined the death of a five-day-old baby, highlighting “missed opportunities” to alter the outcome, according to reports from Evening News 24.James Paget Hospital: An inquest continued into 2025 regarding a newborn’s death, exploring whether an earlier C-section could have saved the baby. A previous ombudsman report found “serious failings” at this trust.Regional Trends: In 2026, concerns were raised about the reporting of baby deaths, with allegations that some deaths are recorded as stillbirths to avoid coroner inquests, impacting transparency in maternity services.Broader Context: While some Trusts in the region have been flagged for high mortality rates, data up to early 2026 indicates Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has maintained lower-than-average mortality rates compared to others.These inquiries are part of a wider focus on improving safety standards across maternity units in England.Babies in Midlands and North ‘more likely to die around birth’ – BBC News15 Jan 2026 — Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, currently the subject of an ongoing police investigation, had worse-than-average rates in nine of the 10 years. In co…BBCInquest into death of newborn baby at James Paget Hospital12 May 2025 — They also feel they were not given alternative options. Mrs Leighwood said: “I was very confused as to what was going on. I did not understand that Arlo might b…EDP248:01’Lack Of Transparency’: Report Finds Some Baby Deaths Recorded As …YouTube·Times NewsInquest into baby’s tragic death at Norfolk and Norwich17 Sept 2024 — Create an account now to manage your newsletters and account details. Already got an account? Sign in. Discover our other newsletters you might enjoy. The paren…Norwich Evening NewsJames Paget Hospital to pay compensation for failings over baby …18 Dec 2019 — James Paget Hospital to pay compensation for failings over baby death. … A hospital has been told to pay compensation to the family of a baby who died because…BBCInquest probes death of baby born at King’s Lynn hospital17 Jun 2024 — An inquest investigating the tragic death of a baby who died at a Norfolk hospital has resumed this week. Phoebe Whitlock-Jones died on June 3 last year, when s…EDP24Parents blame baby deaths on misssed chances at Sussex NHS trust11 Feb 2026 — An independent investigation was carried out by the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB), the body that investigates patient safety concerns across the…BBC AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
The more they spend on the Sussex hospital, the worse it gets. For unexplained adult deaths as well as baby tragedies. It’s reputation just gets worse and worse. I believe apart from poor design, the Susse Country is trying to be too many things to too many people. It was much better when the city had multiple hospitals. Worthing hospital is infinitely better run and of manageable size. This is reflected in its patient outcomes.
It’s an MTC, Tracy. The whole point is that it has everything available. It’s also why you can’t compare it to Worthing, which definitely has its fair share of different problems. Brighton DOES have multiple hospitals; you clearly don’t know about them.
Benjamin, this is a discussion about grieving parents, preventable harm, and families who have lost babies — not a debate club or an opportunity to score points off other commenters. People are expressing pain, anger and concern about maternity failings that have devastated lives. Responding in a dismissive or confrontational way only adds to that distress.
There is a time and place for arguing over hospital structures and policy, but when families are mourning children they never got to watch grow up, basic compassion should come first. Losing a child is not material for point scoring in a comments section.
Respectfully, we can talk about anything we like on here, Lesley. I take your generated point, though, which is why I generally don’t engage Rupert on this topic. If I felt the same applied to Tracy, I would also offer the same compassion.
Tracy frequently makes incorrect or misleading statements; just because it is a sensitive subject for others, it doesn’t mean incorrect or misleading comments should not be challenged. That isn’t an attack on a person, that’s not point scoring, nor is it dismissive or confrontational.
Benjamin this article is about families who have lost babies, mothers harmed during childbirth, and a maternity system now facing a major investigation because of repeated failings. Yet somehow your contribution was to nitpick another commenter and turn the discussion into an argument about hospital structures.
You added absolutely nothing of value to the actual issue. No empathy for grieving parents. No acknowledgment of the suffering behind this review. Just smug corrections and a need to sound intellectually superior in a conversation that was never about you.
People are talking about dead children, lifelong trauma and devastated families. If your first instinct in that context is to posture in the comments section instead of showing basic humanity, then maybe ask yourself why you felt the need to be there at all.
There’s a difference between debate and trolling. On a subject this serious, your comments came across as someone more interested in provoking people than understanding the pain behind the story.
You’re the only person talking in this article?
Benjamin has become notorious for trolling people across a wide range of topics, both past and present, often provoking reactions through controversial or inflammatory comments.
You’ve become notorious for trolling people across a wide range of personas, both past and present, often provoking reactions through a deluge of benighted script.