Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021

Saima Hussain Mann

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0109, written 15 Apr 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report15 Apr 2021
Reference2021-0109
DeceasedSaima Hussain Mann
CoronerAdrian Farrow
Coroner areaManchester South
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Mental Health related deaths · Suicide (from 2015)
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

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

ANNEX A   

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. Chief Executive, Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust  

1    CORONER   

I am Adrian Farrow, assistant coroner, for the coroner area of Manchester South   

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   

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST   

On  12th  August  2019  an  investigation  was  commenced  into  the  death  of  Saima 
Hussain  –  also  known  as  Saima  Hussain  Mann,  aged  40  years.  The  investigation 
concluded at the end of the inquest on 1st April 2021. The conclusion of the inquest 
was that she died of suicide by hanging.   

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
 4    CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH   

The inquest heard that Saima Hussain had a long history of mental disturbance. For the 12 
months  preceding  her  death  on  10th  August  2019,  she  had  assistance  from  the 
Psychological Therapies Service, which concluded at the end of January 2019, followed 
by repeated episodes of crisis. She was an in-patient under s2 Mental Health Act 1983 at 
the beginning of April 2019 and again at the beginning of May 2019. There were a number 
of mental health assessments undertaken during this period, none of which identified any 
risk of harm to herself. The Community Mental Health and the Trafford Adult Social Care 
teams were both involved and she was the subject of discussion at multi-disciplinary and 
Daily Risk meetings. She had contact with her GP.     
Ms Hussain was assessed by a Clinical Psychiatrist, who concluded that she did not meet 
the criteria for assistance by the Community Mental Health Team and an informal referral 
was made back to the therapist at the Psychological Therapies Service who had assisted 
her previously. That informal referral was subsequently formalised.   
The inquest heard that Ms Hussain relied upon particular healthcare professionals in whom 
she had established confidence and trust. Once the referral had been accepted, there was 
no identifiable person who could be a point of contact for Ms Hussain.   
At the time of the handover from the Community Mental Health Team to the 
Psychological Therapies Service, the inquest heard that Ms Hussain told the social 
worker from the   
Community Mental Health Team that she felt “lost” and “abandoned”.    
The Psychological Therapies Services attempted to send an acknowledgement letter to Ms 
Hussain, which was returned undelivered. It was pro-forma in nature and gave no indication 
as to the likely course of events beyond the fact that she had been placed on a waiting list. 
There was no direct contact with Ms Hussain between her discharge from the Community 
Mental Health Team and her death to inform her of the plan for her future care and the 
evidence was that she experienced a further period of crisis which appears to have been  
triggered by the lack of contact and information surrounding her referral to the   

Psychological Therapies Services.   
Ms Hussain took her own life in early August 2019.   

1   

   
  
 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 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. –   

The  Trust  had  systems  and  procedures  in  place  in  relation  to  the  referral  by  the 
Community Mental Health  Team to the Psychological Therapies Services, but there 
did not appear to be in a place a reliable or established system  which would ensure 
that  the  service-user  would  receive  direct  contact  from  the  Trust,  tailored  to  their 
particular situation and condition to ensure that they were fully informed as to the fact, 
status and plan for their referral. The acknowledgement letter which was intended to 
be delivered to Ms Hussain was a pro-forma which gave no indication as to what she 
should expect, beyond the information that she had been placed on a waiting list.  It 
does not appear that the procedures in place take account of the likely needs of the 
service-users who are by definition, seeking assistance with mental illness.   
It is understood that the Community Transformation Project is currently in the process 
of reviewing the mental health service, but there is no timescale available over which 
the question of referrals will be considered.    
Pending that review, my concern is that the level and method of communication with 
those being referred to the service does not take account of their particular needs and 
may affect their mental health.   

6    ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN   

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and your 
organisation 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 10th June 2021. I, the coroner, may extend the period.   

2   

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: 
deceased).  

 (family of deceased), and 

 (family of 

I am also under a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner and all 
interested persons who in my opinion should receive it.   

I may also send a copy of your response to any other person who I believe may find it 
useful or of interest.   

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.   

9    15th April 2021   

Signature:  
Adrian Farrow, Assistant Coroner, Manchester South  

3

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 Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL 

HM Assistant Coroner Mr Adrian Farrow 
Manchester South Coroner’s Office 
1 Mount Tabor Street 
Stockport 
SK1 3AG 

8th June 2021  

Dear Mr Farrow 

   Trust Management Offices 
First Floor, The Curve 
Bury New Road 
Prestwich 
Manchester 
M25 3BL 

Web: www.gmmh.nhs.uk 

Re:  Saima Hussain (deceased) Regulation 28 Preventing Future Deaths Response  

Thank you for highlighting your concerns during Ms Hussain’s Inquest and please see the Trust’s 
response in relation to these concerns below. 

Your MATTERS OF CONCERN were as follows:  
The  Trust  had  systems  and  procedures  in  place  in  relation  to  the  referral  by  the 
Community Mental Health Team to the Psychological Therapies services but there did not 
appear  to  be  in  a  place  a  reliable  or  established  system  which  would  ensure  that  the 
service  user  would  receive  direct  contact  from  the  Trust  tailored  to  their  particular 
situation and condition to ensure that they were fully informed as to the fact, status and 
plan for their referral. The acknowledgement letter which was intended to be delivered to 
Ms  Hussain  was  a  proforma  which  gave  no  indication  as  to  what  she  should  expect, 
beyond the information that she had been placed on the waiting list. It does not appear 
that the procedures in place take account of the likely needs of the service users who are, 
by definition, seeking assistance with mental illness.  
It is understood that the Community Transformation Project is currently in the process of 
reviewing  the  mental  health  service,  but  there  is  no  timescale  available  over  which  the 
question of referrals will be considered. 
Pending that review, my concern is that the level and method of communication with those 
being referred to the service does not take account of their particular needs and may affect 
their mental health.  

As part of the referral process in place across the Trust Psychological Therapies Services there 
is a formal process of triage through the first point of contact which means that there should be 
direct contact with service users from the service following referral. 

In Ms Hussain’s case an informal process was adopted for referral between 

with good intention, unfortunately the formal process for referral was not adopted which 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 meant that she did not receive a telephone call and was not updated regarding the process and 
timescales.  

Ms Hussain had previously said that she wanted to engage with the service, but only with the 
therapist she had previously seen. This was facilitated through the informal discussion between 
 The service did send a letter to Ms Hussain’s address stating that she 
was  on the  waiting  list  for  therapy,  the  letter was  returned  ‘undeliverable’ due to  her  letterbox 
being sealed. 

The Psychological Therapies Service Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is clear about how 
referral should  be managed.  Following  the  return  of  the  letter the  SOP  states that  this should 
have been escalated to a clinical member of staff who would assess any risks and consider how 
the service would be able to best communicate with Ms Hussain.  
We are sorry that this did not happen on this occasion and administration staff did not escalate 
the return of the letter to clinical staff or telephone Ms Hussain due to their previous experience 
of her being hostile.  

To address this the manager of the service has made it clear to all staff the process regarding 
referral and the need for this to be adhered to as well as ensuring that  all administration staff 
have  received  bespoke  training  from  the  Trust  in  relation  to  dealing  with  challenging 
communication on the telephone.  

The  Trust  want  to  assure  you  that  Community  Transformation  Project  will  address  referrals 
between services and how service users are kept informed of the reason for and progress of any 
referrals.  In the interim the Trafford Service Manager is updating the CMHT Standard Operating 
Procedure (SOP) to include the process of discharge from the CMHT’s to ensure that referrals 
into other services are actioned / agreed before the case is discharged and closed to the CMHT’s 
and that this information is contained in the discharge letter from the CMHT and made available 
to the service user. This will be completed by 9th July 2021. The launching of the revised CMHT 
SOP  by  the  end  of  July  2021  will  further  raise  awareness  within  the  team  clinicians  of  the 
component  parts  of  the  service  which  relate  to  the  timing  of  communication.  The  Community 
Service  Manager will  lead on  promoting  and  implementing  this.  This will  be  achieved  through 
face-to-face communication within individual supervision, team Business Meetings and team and 
leadership  development  sessions.  This  will  be  monitored  by  the  Trafford  division  Senior 
Leadership Team (SLT) and completed by the end of August 2021. Through ongoing audit, our 
services and the wider Trust will monitor adherence to practice standards within Trafford CMHT 
services.  The teams will carry out quarterly audits of CMHT discharges to give assurance to the 
Trust  that  this  is  being  adhered  to  for  12  months  following  the  SOP  being  completed  and 
communicated to  the CMHT  staff.  This will be  led  by  the  Team  Manager in  collaboration  with 
CMHT administrators and the action plan monitored via the Trafford SLT and reported back to 
the PIR panel for executive oversight. 

I  hope  this  response  demonstrates  that  GMMH  have  taken  the  concerns  you  have  raised 
seriously. If you have any further questions in relation to the Trust’s response please do let me 
know. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Yours Sincerely, 

Dr 
Medical Director  
GMC

Related reports

Other reports by Adrian Farrow

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) 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.