Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Christina O’Brien

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0221, written 14 Jun 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report14 Jun 2016
Reference2016-0221
DeceasedChristina O’Brien
CoronerChristopher Williams
Coroner areaLondon Inner (South)
CategoryMental Health related deaths · Suicide (from 2015)
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses publishednone published

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)

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

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS |
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. Dr Matthew Patrick Chief Executive South London and Maudesley NHS
Care Trust (SLAM), Bethlem Royal Hospital, Monks Orchard Road,
Beckenham BR3 3BX

2. Secretary of State for Health, Rt. Hon Jeremy Hunt, Richmond House, 79
Whitehall, London SW1A 2NS

3. The Chief Coroner,

1 | CORONER

| am Christopher Williams an assistant coroner, for the coroner area of inner London
South (Southwark Coroners Court).

2 | CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

| 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.

http /Avww legislation gov. uk/uksi/2013/1620/requiation/28/made and

http://www. legisiation gov. uk/uksi/2013/1620/requiation/29/made

3 | INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

An investigation into the death of Christina O’Brien commenced on the 25/9/2015. The
investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 7" June 2016. The conclusion of
the inquest was that the medical cause of death was 1(a) hanging. The short form
conclusion was “Suicide”.

4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

1) On the 17/9/2015 the deceased hanged herself, directly outside her flat, using a
belt attached to a window handle. She had also made incisions in her arms and
legs. A note was found in the flat which made provision for the distribution of her
property and the care of her pet dog. The note said at the end “I am sorry’.
Following a forced entry police found large traces of blood around the flat and in
the bath.

2) At the time of her death she had suffered from a long term mental illness
described as Schizoaffective disorder for which she was taking her anti-
psychotic medication and was capable of understanding the consequences of
her actions.

IE

3) The inquest heard evidence that at the time of her death the deceased was i
receiving treatment and care for her mental illness from the SLAM mental health |
department.

4) The deceased was first diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia in
1984 after she attempted suicide by cutting her wrists. In the following years she
was admitted to hospital for psychiatric care on numerous occasions. She was . :
detained under the Mental Health Act on number of occasions. There were also
incidents of self harm and suicide attempts between 1984 and September 2015.

5) MEE the treating psychiatrist at the time of death gave evidence that the
deceased was affected by a spectrum of the following mental health conditions:
Paranoid schizophrenia; Clinical depression; Anxiety Symptoms including
Agoraphobia and panic attacks; Obsessive compulsive disorder; and mood
instability.

6) On the 20" January 2015 the deceased attempted suicide by taking an

overdose and making a deep incision with a kitchen knife on her left wrist. The

wound subsequently required plastic surgery. As a result she was detained for a

short period under the Mental Health Act.

pao

7) In February 2015 following discharge from hospital after the suicide attempt, she
identified to the mental health team that builders working at her accommodation
were “a big stressor’.

8) Her sister described, following the discharge from

hospital, the on-going building work on the roof of the deceased's flat as
extremely noisy and frightening for her. The deceased believed workmen were
leaving tools outside her window on scaffolding to encourage her to kill herself.
The deceased had also said she feared that the builders were listening in on

telephone conversations with her sister. The building work on her flat remained
on going and was continuing for several months. |

9) Inher evidence, which | accepted, MEEEEEEsaid that: -

¢ The deceased was very distressed by the building work at her flat and needed
respite from it.

¢ In the past the deceased had been able to reside at a halfway house [Dove
House (women’s service) provided by SLAM]. This provided respite for
vulnerable people who were nat ill enough to be admitted to hospital.

¢ The Dove House facility was no longer available in 2015. |

e After the deceased was discharged from hospital in February 2015 she took
refuge from her flat at the home of her boyfriend’s mother which was something i
she did not want as she had difficulties around the idea the idea of family. This
had a damaging effect on the deceased's mental health when she returned to
her flat after completion of the building work.

10) EEE expressed the opinion that had the Dove House option been available I
during 2015 her sister would still be alive today. The opinion was based on the
experience that in the past the deceased had resided at Dove House for short
periods and this had a positive effect on her behaviour. The house was not in a
hospital setting but in a residential street. She was not detained there and was
free to leave if she wished.

11) | also heard evidence from FS on behalf of SLAM who informed me
that Dove House closed down about 8 years ago (c.2008) and it was not known
whether this was due to funding issues or whether the service was considered
not to be effective.

12) informed me that, in 2015, the broad treatment options were: -

¢ Treatment whilst detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
¢ Informal admission to hospital
« Home Treatment team attending the patient at home.

13) EE aiso said that in April 2015 during the building work the Home
Treatment team attended on the deceased at home and helped to reduce the
level of distress and provided sleeping medication.

14) EE saia that the deceased would not have agreed to informal admission
to hospital whilst the building works were on going and that she did not like the
Home Treatment team attending on her at home. She said there was a gap in
the service by not having temporary non-hospital accommodation as a treatment
option.

15) A Sudden a (SUI) report, produced by SLAM, addressed the
concern of| in the following terms: -

“Patient A’s sister ... pointed out that there was, in her opinion, a lack of available
respite for patient A during the period of her building work. She felt that this was
an overwhelming experience for her sister which had significantly impacted on
her mental state between April and June 2015 ... in the past Dove House had
provided a crucial source of support for her sister when she was relapsing and
might have proven a welcome alternative to the stresses of her home
environment. Unfortunately this service is no longer available and there are
presently no other crisis options other than admissions or home treatment”
(page 31 paragraph (8) SUI 23/11/15).

16) The SUI report made the following recommendation: -

“We recommend the CAG reviews the local need for respite care for clients
experiencing crises which do not meet the threshold for admission and where
Home Treatment is not suitable/appropriate.”

(page 32 SUI 23/11/15).

Nb. The initials “CAG” stand for Clinical Academic Group

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 could 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) lam concerned that the options for mentally ill people in the community needing
respite care through SLAM are limited solely to attendance by the Home
Treatment team as the alternative to hospital admission. In this particular case |
found that the availability of Dove House did, in the past, provide respite for the
deceased. | also find, on the evidence | heard, that if this option had been
available in 2015 the death might have been prevented. Whilst the Home
Treatment team could provide support by way of medication and counselling it
could not deal with the source of the distress the deceased was suffering from
building work.

(2) Given the unpredictability of the perceptions of people with mental illness in the

community | also found that having a further option of respite residence in a non

hospital setting could prevent future self-inflicted deaths. Examples that spring
to mind, in a high density area like Lambeth, might be bullying by neighbours or
sources of excessive noise from neighbouring residences as well as building

~

work.

(3) lam concerned that the Dove House facility was withdrawn in about 2008
without any provision being made for alternative respite care when it appeared
to have had a beneficial effect for the deceased and, by reasonable inference,
other SLAM patients.

(4) At the conclusion of the inquest, it was suggested to me by the solicitor for
SLAM that | should also make a PFD report to Lambeth Social Services as well
as SLAM. | indicated at the time that | would consider this option. Having
reflected on the matter | have decided not to do this since | consider that the
need for respite care is a clinical issue for SLAM in the first instance. If SLAM
eventually consider that respite care ought to be available then it is matter for
the organisation to decide whether to deliver respite care through its own
resources or by liaising with other agencies.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken by SLAM to prevent future deaths and | believe
your organisation has the power to take the following action: -

1. Review the local need for respite care for clients experiencing crises which do not
meet the threshold for admission to hospital and where Home Treatment is not
suitable/appropriate or adequate.

2. Since the respite care residence option was provided in the past, serious
consideration shouid be given to reintroducing this resource as a treatment/rehabilitation
option.

3. If when considering the, respite care residence, option it is decided that SLAM does
not have the financial resources to provide the facility then in my opinion consideration
should be given to liaison with other agencies to ensure provision of the facility when
clinically required.

4, When responding to this report a clear indication should be given for the reasons why
the Dove House facility was withdrawn in 2009, and in particular whether this was for
financial reasons or reasons of clinical effectiveness.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by g" August 2016. |, 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
Person: | have also sent it to the Secretary of State for Health,
Department of Health who may find it useful or of interest.

| 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.

14" June 2016 Christopher Williams — Assistant Coroner
Also filed under 2016-0221: 2016-0221-South-London-and-Maudsley-NHS-Trust.pdf
South London and Maudsley NHS)

NHS Foundation Trust

Dr Matthew Patrick
Chief Executive
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
18 Floor Administration Building
Maudsley Hospital
Denmark Hill
London SE5 8AZ
Mr Christopher Williams
Assistant Coroner
Southwark Coroners Court
1 Tennis Street
Southwark
SE1 1YD

4 August 2016

Dear Mr Williams

Re: Christina O’Brien. Died 17.09.15. Po

| write in response to the Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths dated
13 June 2016, which you sent following the Inquest into the death of Ms O’Brien.

In the report, you raised some concerns and my response to each of these and
details of actions taken by the Trust are listed below.

1. Review of the local need for respite care for clients experiencing crises
which do not meet the threshold for admission to hospital and where
HTT is not suitable / appropriate or adequate.

Please see my response to point 2 (below).

2. Serious consideration should be given to reintroducing this resource as
a treatment/Rehab option.

Dove House was not a crisis house and it was decommissioned with joint agreement
between the Trust and the former Lambeth PCT in 2009 due to there being low
demand for a facility of this type. The Trust closed the Emergency Clinic at the
Maudsley Hospital approximately eight years ago for clinical reasons.

The Trust undertook a review of crisis house provision during 2014 and this review
was led by the living well collaborative. This report is attached for your further
information. The view taken following this review was that a residential option was
problematic in that typically bed based crisis beds tend to get silted up quickly so
took the position we should trial out a non-bed based model. The outcome was to
pilot the evening sanctuary from April 2015 for two to three days per week. This
provision has been commissioned full time from the week beginning 11 July 2016
and provides an out of hour’s alternative to people experiencing crisis.

Additionally, crisis services in the Trust have developed a great deal since Dove
House closed. Home Treatment Team provision has been expanded, Psychiatric
Liaison Nurse provision has been expanded, peer support (including out of hours) is
now provided, a SLaM 24 hour helpline was introduced this year and a Street Triage
service has been in place since 2015.

3. Indicate if there are resource implications for the Trust in setting this up
and if so who should be ensuring this provision.

Please see responses 1-3 which highlight both clinical and financial rationale for
closure of Dove House and services going forward.

4. Clear indication of the reasons why Dove House was closed in 2009

A report entitled ‘Proposal to Redevelop Dove House, Lambeth Women’s Mental
Health Crisis House into a Women’s Therapeutic Day Treatment Centre’ (report
undated) stated the following:

Reason for changes

Lambeth PCT is required to make significant financial savings in 2006/7 and 2007/8.
It is proposed that part of these savings are secured by closing Dove House as a
short-term residential unit for women in mental health distress and instead, providing
a therapeutic day treatment service for a larger number of women with severe mental
health problems.

The main driver for these changes is the need to produce cost savings, however, we
are also endeavouring to maintain and even improve standards of care in this
process. However, as highlighted in point number two above due to both external
and internal feedback crisis services in the Trust have developed and expanded
greatly over the last few years to be available to a wider client group.

Progress with these matters will be monitored as necessary by the Trust Quality Sub
Committee.

| hope that this letter addresses the issues that you have raised and | would like to
thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention.

Yours sincerely

HEA CQL Di REGow

Chief Executive

Related reports

Other reports by Christopher Williams

See all →

More reports categorised “Mental Health related deaths”

See all →

Track Mental Health related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Mental Health related deaths, 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.