Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Shalane Blackwood

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0179, written 3 May 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report3 May 2016
Reference2016-0179
DeceasedShalane Blackwood
CoronerStephanie Haskey
Coroner areaNottinghamshire
CategoryState Custody related deaths
Organisation namedNottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses publishednone published

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) 
2.  The Governor, HMP Nottingham 
3.  Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust (as responsible for healthcare at HMP 

Nottingham 

4.  NHS England, as commissioners of healthcare at HMP Nottingham. 

1 

CORONER 

I am Miss Stephanie Haskey, Assistant Coroner, for the Coroner area of 
Nottinghamshire 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 
and Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

3 

4 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 
Shalane Blackwood died at HMP Nottingham on 5th August 2015. An investigation was 
begun, an Inquest opened and heard from 25th April 2015 to 3rd May 2015 before a Jury. 
The Jury concluded that the duodenal ulcer should have been diagnosed and treated 
and that systematic failures amounting to neglect by prison and healthcare staff 
significantly contributed to his death. 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 
Mr Blackwood died as a result of a bleed from a duodenal ulcer. His case was complex 
and his presentation challenging due in part to his being unable to communicate 
effectively. At the time of his death he was on a “four person unlock” in the Segregation 
Unit and had been referred for specialist mental health opinion. There was evidence that 
he had bled, for a reason unknown at the time, on 4th August but that no GP or hospital 
referral was made following the blood being observed. 

5 

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 to you. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:   

1. 

 That there is no proper provision for the care and supervision of prisoners who 
present with complex physical and/or mental health needs. It is understood that 
such a provision could be provided by means of an inpatient unit within the 
prison, such as for example is the case at HMP Liverpool. 

2.  That at present, if a prisoner is assessed as needing a four person unlock, and 

is within the Segregation Unit, there are insufficient prison staff to provide him 
with a proper regime and to unlock him after lunchtime, for example to allow 

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3.  That the use of New Psychoactive Substances (NPS) remains rife within the 

prison, and presentations such as Mr Blackwood’s are not diminishing, and that 
the Substance Misuse Team requires further staff to be effective in future. 

4.  That the documentary tool for decision making between prison staff and 

healthcare staff, as to whether a prisoner is fit to remain in Segregation and 
should do so, is unclear in design or in use. 

5.  That healthcare staff are insufficiently alert to the issue that physical symptoms 
which require urgent medical attention may be occluded by mental health 
issues. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe your 
organisations, as appropriate to the issues above, have the power to take such action.  

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by………………... I, 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. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested 
Persons: 

1.  Mr Blackwood’s Family  

I have also sent it to: 
      1.  The Prison and Probation Ombudsman and the Care Quality Commission 

who may find it useful or of interest. 

I 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 
form. 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. 

9 

[DATE]                                              [SIGNED BY CORONER] 

2

Related reports

Other reports by Stephanie Haskey

See all →

More reports categorised “State Custody related deaths”

See all →

Track Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Nottinghamshire Healthcare 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.