Suzanne Morgan said she will never forget the day her mother died — nine months after a routine hospital blood transfusion following treatment for gallstones. "She went downhill rapidly," Morgan recalled. Her mother haemorrhaged in her liver and died the next day.
But Morgan and other victims of infected blood now face a further ordeal: having to locate medical records from decades ago to demonstrate that they meet the criteria for compensation. Claimants report being required to produce detailed historical documentation of treatments and transfusions, a task made difficult by the passage of time and the loss of hospital files.
Those affected say the process forces them to revisit traumatic events. "I have to keep reliving it," Morgan said, describing the emotional toll of chasing paperwork while grieving. Many families say the search for records can be expensive, time‑consuming and distressing, particularly where hospitals or clinics no longer hold archives from the relevant period.
The requirement to supply old records comes despite recommendations from a public inquiry into infected blood, which sought to address the suffering of victims and streamline access to redress. Campaigners and claimants argue that insisting on documentary proof from many years earlier runs counter to the spirit of those recommendations, and leaves vulnerable people to carry the burden of proof.
Authorities and administrators responsible for compensation schemes have been urged by some affected individuals to adopt more flexible approaches — such as accepting alternative forms of evidence or relying on inquiry findings — to determine eligibility without forcing claimants to reconstruct decades‑old medical histories. As the controversy continues, victims say the combination of grief, bureaucratic hurdles and incomplete records is compounding an already painful legacy.