Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2022

Gemma Ingham

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2022-0113, written 19 Apr 2022. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report19 Apr 2022
Reference2022-0113
DeceasedGemma Ingham
CoronerNigel Meadows
Coroner areaManchester City
CategoryMental Health related deaths · Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
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. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

• Dr. 

Medical Director
GMMH NHS Trust
Trust HQ,
Bury New Road,
Prestwich,
Manchester
M25 3BL

Copied for interest to: 

•
• The CQC

1  CORONER 

I am: Senior Coroner Nigel Meadows 
Senior Coroner for Manchester City Area 

HM Coroner’s Court and Office 
Exchange Floor 
The Royal Exchange Building 
Cross Street 
Manchester 
M2 7EF 

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 the 12th February 2021 I commenced an investigation into the death of. The investigation 
concluded on the 18th February 2022. 

The Conclusion of the inquest was: Narrative Conclusion: The deceased suffered from 
chronic illicit drug abuse and mental disorders. She was sent to Prison the 13 October 2020 
and transferred to a mental health unit on the 10 December 2020 and remained a patient 
detained under the Mental Health Act until the 13 January 2021 when she was discharged. 

1 

 She was found in a state of cardiac arrest on 30 January 2021 and died in Wythenshawe 
Hospital on the 31 January 2021. It was not possible to determine the cause of her cardiac 
arrest. 

4  CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

The deceased was reported to suffer from mental illness but there was a recognised lack of 
defined diagnostic certainty. However, she did been established history of illicit and 
prescribed drug misuse as well as past contact with mental health services over several 
years, homelessness, a chaotic lifestyle and being vulnerable. She had a significant forensic 
history and had served previous custodial sentences.  

Following the deceased’s death the GMMH NHS trust carried out a serious incident 
investigation and identified several significant issues relating to her care and management. 

In July 2020 she was taken by the police to hospital as a place of safety and was expressing 
suicidal ideation but failed to engage with an assessment and self-discharged. In September 
2020 she was admitted to hospital and treated for heroin overdose but once again self-
discharged. She was convicted of an assault offence serious enough for her to be sent to 
Prison on the 13 October 2020. Whilst in prison she was diagnosed with presenting with 
psychotic symptoms and was prescribed several drugs including antipsychotics and 
antidepressant medication but with either none will poor compliance. 

On the 10 December 2020 she was transferred to a secure psychiatric intensive care mental 
health unit (PICU) and was diagnosed with Psychosis although she continued to make 
threats of physical abuse to staff. She remained detained under the Mental Health Act when 
her sentence on imprisonment finished on the 14 December 2020 and continued to be 
treated with antipsychotic medication. 

On 12 January 2021 she was reviewed for consideration of a supported discharge by the 
Home based Treatment Team (HBTT) it was concluded that she was not suitable for that 
form of supported community treatment and would benefit from a further period in hospital  
and would require a formal MHA and capacity assessment. The clinical records did not 
demonstrate how this conclusion was reached nor why this rationale was appropriate. There 
was an inadequate mental state examination. 

 On 13 January 2021 she went AWOL from the ward but instead of asking her to return she 
was discharged from the hospital despite her having no fixed abode and inconsistently 
engaged with Community Mental Health Services over a long period of time. 

Nonetheless, she was still discharged to the HBTT even though this was inconsistent with 
the assessment that she was not ready for community treatment. They were were asked to 
do a standard 72 hour/4/7 day follow up. There was no clear clinical rationale for this 
decision or appropriate records made or apparent regard had to her chronological history or 
correlate established facts and relevant factors. The risk assessment was inadequate. There 
was a failure to rule out any physical causation for some of or all of her symptoms or clearly 
document why further detention under the MHA was impracticable or legally inappropriate. 
However, the dosage of her antipsychotic medication was being increased. 

Some of the clinical records make references to her "not taking responsibility for her own 
care" which is stigmatising and "no clear role for HBTT" but without clear clinical reasons.  

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On he 18 and 19 January she saw a HBTT practitioner and consented to the administration 
of her Depot medication but appeared sedated. She failed to attend 4 subsequent 
appointments for review or administration of her Depot and indicated when contacted by 
phone that she would no longer accept her Depot. 

On the 30 January 2021 she was found at 
Greater Manchester in a state of cardiac arrest. When the paramedics attended there were 
two men present in the room who would not identify themselves and it was believed that she 
had been moved from the sofa to the floor by one or both of the men. They said she no fixed 
address and was a drug user and have been taking heroin and an unknown quantity of 
pregabalin. Subsequently these men could not be identified by the police were associated 
with extensive records of offences of drug possession, assaults, public order and affray at 
the premises. 

 Broadheath, Altrincham, 

It could not established with any certainty how long she had been in cardiac arrest or its 
precise cause although it was thought likely that it was drug-related. She was resuscitated 
and taken to Wythenshawe Hospital where she was then diagnosed with a hypoxic brain 
injury. Despite treatment her condition deteriorated, and she died on the 31 January 2021. 
Pathologically it was not possible to determine the calls cardiac arrest. 

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.  The repeated instances of inadequate or incomplete necessary clink clinical record 

keeping. 

2.  The decision made to discharge to community HBTT care when they had indicated 
that the patient was not ready for supported community care and there had been no 
clear clinical rationale. 

3.  Discharging a patient with a long forensic history and inconsistent engagement with 

mental health services who still required administered Depot antipsychotic 
medication and was a vulnerable adult. 

4.  Inadequate and incomplete risk assessments and mental state examinations. 
5.  Discharging a patient who had no appropriate fixed abode and no established 

community family support arrangements. 

6.  A significant failure to consider a safeguarding referral and assessment for a 

vulnerable adult suffering from serious mental disorder. 

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 the 21st June 2022. I, the Coroner, may extend the period. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 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 Interested Persons. I have also 
sent it to organisations 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:  19th April 2022                  Mr Nigel Meadows  

HM Senior Coroner  

                       Manchester City Area

                                                         Signed: 

4

Related reports

Other reports by Nigel Meadows

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.