Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

Janette Insley

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0574, written 16 Dec 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report16 Dec 2014
Reference2014-0574
DeceasedJanette Insley
CoronerLisa Hashmi
Coroner areaManchester North
CategoryMental Health related deaths
Organisation namedPennine Care NHS Foundation Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text recovered by OCR from a scanned PDF. OCR is imperfect: check anything you rely on against the source PDF. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1. Secretary of State for Health, Department of Health, London

CORONER

1am Ms L J Hashmi, Area Coroner for the Coroner area of Manchester North.

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

| make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28
and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
On the 5" December 2014, | commenced an investigation into the death of Ms Janette Insley.

|...

CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH

The Deceased had a longstanding history of depressive illness. In May 2014 her mental and
psychological health deteriorated markedly resulting in her admission to a mental health unit as an
informal patient. She declined pharmaceutical intervention on the basis that she believed she was
suffering from Protracted Withdrawal Syndrome and that medication was responsible for her signs
and symptoms. The doctors caring for the deceased did not share this view, their diagnosis being
that the deceased was suffering from traits of personality disorder and an inability to cope with
psychosocial stressors. They felt that there was no evidence of a biological depressive disorder
during the course of the index admission. Upon this basis, the hospital doctors considered that
referral to a Psychologist for care and treatment was the most appropriate course of action.

Discharge planning was commenced and halted on several occasions due to episodes of serious
self-harm by the deceased, including attempts at self-ligature and overdose.

During the course of her inpatient stay, the deceased was allowed time off the ward/leave away
from the ward, subject to risk assessment by care staff. On the whole, whilst very stressful for the
deceased, the periods of leave passed without incident.

However, on the 3 August 2014 the Deceased failed to return to the ward following afternoon
home leave. Enquiries were made by ward staff and the deceased's ex-partner/friend in an
attempt to make contact.

Ms Insley was subsequently found deceased at her home address later that evening, having self-
ligatured.

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In my opinion there is
a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to
report fo you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:-

1. During the course of the evidence | was told that whilst the Consultant Psychiatrist
considered that a referral to a Psychologist was the most appropriate course of treatment

available, staff were unable to make any such referral for inpatients due to lack of i)
availability of suitably qualified practitioners and ii) resources. There is therefore a clear
service gap. :

2. | was also told that most, if not all, Psychological therapy now takes place within the
community. It would appear that undue emphasis is currently being placed upon this
setting of care, to the detriment of inpatient services.

3. That any referral to/consultation with a Psychologist based within the community would
have taken at least 3-4 weeks post-discharge, thus leaving the patient without therapy
during a particularly vulnerable period.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe each of you respectively
have the power to take such action.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely 11" February
2015. |, the Coroner, may extend the period.

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for
action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed.

COPIES and PUBLICATION

| have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons namely:-
- The Deceased’s family
- Pennine Care NHS Trust
- CEO, Bury CCG

! am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.

The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary from. He may send a
copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of interest, You may make
representations to me the coroner at the time of your response, about the release or the publication of your
response by the Chief Coroner.

Date: 16" December 2014 Signed: GL ™ -

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Department of Health (PDF)
AS
AER Z From Norman Lamb MP

Minister of State for Care and Support

Department
of Health
Richmond House
79 Whitehall
London
. SWI1A 2NS
Mrs L Hashmi Tel: 020 7210 4850
Area Coroner
HM Coroner’s Court
The Phoenix Centre
L/Cpl Stephen Shaw 27 FEB 2015
MC Way Heywood
OL10 1LR

Dew (Ln Habhhnr,

I Thank you for your letter following the inquest into the death of Janette Insley.
I was very sorry to hear of Ms Insley’s death and wish to extend my sincere
condolences to her family.

The inquest concluded that Ms Insley died as a result of self-ligature.

I understand Ms Insley had a history of depressive illness and in May 2014 was
admitted as an informal patient to a mental health unit. Her doctors believed she had
a personality disorder and considered that referral to a psychologist for care and
treatment was the most appropriate action. Although discharge planning then
commenced it had to be halted several times due to serious self-harm episodes by Ms
Insley.

During her inpatient stay, Ms Insley was allowed leave away from the ward, subject
to risk assessment by staff. On the whole, these periods of leave passed without
incident. Unfortunately on 3 August 2014 she failed to return from an afternoon
home leave and was discovered dead at her home address later that evening.

You have a number of concerns following the inquest:

e Although the consultant psychiatrist considered that a referral to a
psychologist was the most appropriate course of treatment available, staff
were unable to make any such referral for inpatients due to lack of i)
availability of suitably qualified practitioners and ii) resources. You
consider there is therefore a clear service gap;

e You were told that most, if not all, psychological therapy now takes place
within the community. You consider that undue emphasis is currently
being placed upon this setting of care, to the detriment of inpatient
services.

e You note that referral to/consultation with a psychologist based within the
community would have taken at least 3-4 weeks post-discharge, thus
leaving the patient without therapy during a particularly vulnerable period.

You have copied your report to the relevant NHS Trust and Clinical Commissioning
Group. The issues you raised are most appropriately addressed at a local level and I
would expect the NHS organisations responsible to respond fully to your concerns.

At a national level the Government is investing over £400 million over the current
spending review period to enable a greater choice of psychological therapies to be
offered to patients who need them, across the whole of England.

The Department of Health’s 2014-15 Mandate to NHS England makes clear that
“everyone who needs it should have timely access to evidence based services”. The
Mandate sets a clear objective for NHS England to deliver the key objectives of the
Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme. This includes
providing access to therapies to 15% of those eligible (around 900,000 people per
year), per year by 2015, with a recovery rate of 50%.

The Outcomes Framework for the NHS in England clearly states that the NHS
should carry on expanding access to psychological services as part of the JAPT
programme. In addition, the Department’s new five-year plan for mental health,
Achieving Better Access to Mental Health Services by 2020 was published in
October 2014. This articulates our ambition and the immediate actions we will take
this year and next to achieve better access and waiting times in mental health
services. This includes the IAPT commitment of treatment within 6 weeks for 75%
of people with 95% of people being treated within 18 weeks.

I hope that this response is helpful and I am grateful to you for bringing the
circumstances of Ms Insley’s death to my attention.

L A-ce-cA_, ‘

PL _..| 2

NORMAN LAMB

Related reports

Other reports by Lisa Hashmi

See all →

More reports categorised “Mental Health related deaths”

See all →

Track Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.