Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

Sarah Sutherland

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0148, written 15 Mar 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report15 Mar 2024
Reference2024-0148
DeceasedSarah Sutherland
CoronerKaren Henderson
Coroner areaSurrey
CategorySuicide (from 2015)
Organisation namedSurrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published3

The report

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

IN THE SURREY CORONER’S COURT 
IN THE MATTER OF: 

__________________________________________________________ 

The Inquest Touching the Death of Sarah Louise Sutherland  
A Regulation 28 Report – Action to Prevent Future Deaths 
__________________________________________________________ 

1  THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1  Chief Executive, UK Council of Psychotherapy 
2  President Royal College of Psychiatrists 
3  Chief Executive NHS England 
4  Chief Executive CQC 
5  Brainwaves - 

2  CORONER 

Dr Karen Henderson, H.M. Assistant Coroner for Surrey 

3  CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 5 to The Coroners 
and Justice Act 2009. 

4 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 17th December 2023 I resumed an investigation into the death of Sarah 
Louise Sutherland. On 17th January 2024, the investigation was concluded:  

The medical cause of death given was: 

1a. Suspension 

I recorded the following in Box 3 of the Record of Inquest: 

Sarah Louise Sutherland had significant mental health challenges with an 

ongoing history of suicidal ideation and self-harm. On the 17th December 

2022, Ms Sutherland was found to have died by intention through self-

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 suspension at her home address in Redhill having last been known to be 

alive on the 15th December 2022.  

I concluded Ms Sutherland died by way of Suicide. 

5  CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

1.  In 2017 Ms Sutherland was referred to NHS Mental Health Services with 

suicidal ideation and depression and until her death remained under the 

care of the Community Mental Health Recovery Service and in times of 

crisis the Home Treatment Team with a diagnosis of Emotionally 

Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD) and Post Traumatic Stress 

Disorder. 

2.  At the same time, Ms Sutherland sought the assistance of a private 

psychotherapist providing ‘humanistic integrative’ therapy and had 

twice weekly appointments from September 2017 until 2 days before her 

death 

3.  The psychotherapist kept no clinical records of the initial assessment or 

treatment throughout the five years on the grounds that this was not 

necessary, and it would contravene GDPR regulations with no change of 

practice following Ms Sutherland’s death.  

4.  Throughout the five years as a client, Ms Sutherland’s psychotherapist 

could not provide any evidence of ongoing analysis, evaluation, 

assessment or review of Ms Sutherland as to whether this 

psychotherapeutic approach was beneficial. Nor was there any any 

 
 
 
 
 
 consideration as to whether alternative psychotherapeutic approaches 

would have been more beneficial to manage Ms Sutherland’s mental 

health and other difficulties. 

5.  The psychotherapist was unable to adequately explain the benefit of 

‘humanistic integrative’ psychotherapy for Ms Sutherland’s underlying 

mental health difficulties. 

6.  The psychotherapist did not undertake any risk assessments as to 

whether the psychotherapeutic approach was appropriate (e.g. exploring 

‘trauma;’) given the underlying diagnosis of EUPD with the knowledge 

of a long history of suicidal ideation and acts of self-harm. 

7.  The psychotherapist did not provide evidence of an agreed and 

appropriate therapeutic boundary or to appear to respect one given that 

Ms Sutherland was given regular access to walking her dogs and to bring 

treats for her cat outside of therapeutic sessions, leading to a real concern 

that Ms Sutherland had become dependent on the psychotherapist 

outside of a therapeutic relationship. 

8.  Whilst there are sensitivities involved with ‘shared’ care between a 

private and NHS service there was no useful communication either 

formally or informally from either party to ensure both knew what each 

were doing to work in Ms Sutherland’s best interests with the 

psychotherapist being dismissive of so doing. 

9.  In  the  latter  half  of  2022  Ms  Sutherland’s  mental  health  deteriorated 

requiring intensive treatment from the Home Treatment Team. Although 

there  was  some  stabilisation  in  her  mental  health  with  a  reduction  in 

negative thoughts, Ms Sutherland ended her life shortly thereafter. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 6  ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I 

believe that the people listed in paragraph 1 have the power to take such 

action.   

7  YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of its date; I 

may extend that period on request. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be 

taken, setting out the timetable for such action. Otherwise, you must 

explain why no action is proposed. 

 
 
 9  COPIES 

I have sent a copy of this report to the following: 

1.  See names in paragraph 1 above 

2. 

3. 

In addition to this report, I am 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 at the time of your response, about the release or 

the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.  

10  Signed: 

Dr Karen Henderson 

DATED this 15th March 2024

Responses

3 responses 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 Care Quality Commission (PDF)
H.M. Coroners Office 

For the attention of:  
Dr Karen Henderson, Assistant Coroner 
Surrey Coroners Court  

HSCA Further Information 
Citygate 
Gallowgate 
Newcastle upon Tyne 
NE1 4PA 

www.cqc.org.uk 

22 April 2024 

Dear Dr Henderson, 

Care Quality Commission:  

Response to prevention of future death report following an inquest into the 
death of Sarah Louise Sutherland 

Thank  you  for  naming 
,  Chief  Executive  of  the  Care  Quality 
Commission  (CQC)  as  a  respondent  in  the  Prevention  of  Future  Death  report 
issued following the death of Sarah Louise Sutherland on 17 December 2022.   

We note that the concern raised in the Prevention of Future Deaths Report at part 
5 are as follows: 

1)  Guidelines for regulation and management of private psychotherapists. 

a)  The psychotherapist did not fulfil the UKCP (of which she is a member) 
Code of Ethics and Professional Practice by failing to keep any clinical 
records  in  the  care  she  provided  to  Ms  Sutherland,  nor  has  her 
practiced changed since Ms Sutherland’s death.  

b) The psychotherapist did not at any time undertake risk assessments 
and  blurred  if  not  crossed  the  boundary  of  a  therapeutic  relationship 
between a therapist and a client. 

Unfortunately, the CQC is unable to provide reassurance required regarding this 
concern  or  to  comment  upon  it.  The  private  practice  where  Sarah  Louise 
Sutherland received psychotherapy is not registered with CQC and therefore not 
regulated by the CQC. The psychotherapist would not be required to register with 
CQC unless she was providing a regulated activity as defined in section 8 of the 
Health and Social Care Act 2008 and Part 1 paragraph 2 of the Health and Social 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014.   There is no evidence at 
this time that suggests she was providing a regulated activity requiring registration 
and regulation by the CQC.  

 appears to work alone as an ‘individual’ and offers a range of 

talking therapies for people with a range of mental health concerns. 

Searches of the following registers find no additional registration information to 
indicate Ms Woodhall is a health care professional as defined in the health and 
social care act and associated regulations https://www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-
providers/regulations-enforcement/legislation 

•  General medical Council 
•  Nursing and midwifery Council 
•  Health and care professions Council 
•  Social Work England 

The regulated activity considered in this case is the treatment of disease, 
disorder or injury. The HSCA 2008 defines this regulated activity as follows: 

Treatment of a disease, disorder or injury covers a wide range of treatments. We 
don’t provide a complete list here, but it includes examples such as: 

•  emergency treatment 
•  ongoing treatment for long-term conditions 
• 
•  giving vaccinations or immunisations 
•  palliative care. 

treatment for a physical or mental health condition or learning disability 

This regulated activity applies to the treatment of disease, disorder, or injury in 
any setting, for example hospitals, clinics, hospices, ambulances, GP and dental 
surgeries, community services, and care homes. 

This activity covers a treatment that is: 

•  provided by or under the supervision of a defined list of healthcare 

professionals (see what this means in our glossary of terms) or by a multi-
disciplinary team that includes a listed healthcare professional, or 

•  provided by or under the supervision of a social worker where the 

treatment is for a mental disorder, or by a multi-disciplinary team that 
includes a social worker where the treatment is for a mental disorder, and 
is 

• 

for a disease, disorder or injury. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It is acknowledged that the deceased was in receipt of therapeutic interventions 
in the community from 
registration, the treatment would need to be provided under the supervision of a 
listed healthcare professional. 

. However, in order to meet the scope of 

At this time, and based on the information available to us, there is no evidence 
that 
 meets the definition of a healthcare professional, and therefore 
would not be required to register with CQC for the regulated activity treatment of 
disease, disorder or injury. 

We do not consider any of the other regulated activities appropriate in this case. 

We understand that 
 is registered with UK Council of Psychotherapy. 
UKCP  are  better  placed  than  CQC  to  act  in  the  regulation  and  management  of 
private psychotherapists.  

2.)  Proactive  need  for  co-ordination  of  NHS  mental  Health  services  and 
Private Psychotherapy  

a)  Following  Ms  Sutherland’s  death,  Surrey  and  Borders  NHS 
Foundation  Trust  have,  as  long  as  client  consent  is  obtained, 
introduced  a  ‘standard  process  for  communication  with  private 
providers  of  psychological  therapies’.  However,  there  is  a  national 
lack of co-ordination of treatment and communication between NHS 
and private providers of mental health care with no formal or informal 
mechanism or processes in place to liaise with each other to ensure 
the best mental health care and safety of their clients. 

CQC  welcomes  the  action  taken  by  Surrey  and  Borders  Partnership  NHS 
Foundation  Trust  to  implement  a  process  to  standardise  communication  with 
private providers of psychological therapies.  

While  CQC  share  the Coroner’s  concerns  in  relation  to  the  lack of  a  formalised 
mechanism for liaison and communication between NHS and private providers this 
is outside the scope of our regulatory powers. NHS England are better placed to 
act  in  setting  requirements  and  expectations  for  improving  this  coordination  of 
services.  

We appreciate the Coroner raising these concerns with CQC, since receiving the 
Regulation 28 report we have reviewed the information relating to the death in line 
with  our  regulatory  process  and  methodology.  Whilst  we  don’t  consider  there  is 
any regulatory action that currently needs to be taken we will continue to monitor 
the trust and any new information that we receive in line with our internal process 
and methodology 

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us further. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Yours sincerely 

Deputy Director 
South Network 

4
Response from NHS England (PDF)
Dr Karen Henderson 
HM Assistant Coroner  
Surrey Coroner’s Court 
Station Approach  
Woking  
GU22 7AP 

Dear Coroner, 

National Medical Director  
NHS England  
Wellington House 
133-155 Waterloo Road  
London 
SE1 8UG 

19 April 2024 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Sarah Louise Sutherland 
who died on 17th December 2022 

Thank you for your Report to Prevent Future Deaths (hereafter “Report”) dated 15th 
March 2024 concerning the death of Sarah Louise Sutherland on 17th December 2022. 
In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like 
to express my deep condolences to Sarah’s family and loved ones. NHS England are 
keen to assure the family and the coroner that the concerns raised about Sarah’s care 
have been listened to and reflected upon.   

This response focuses on the areas of concern raised in your Report that are relevant 
to NHS England national policy and programmes. We note that you have addressed 
your Report to other organisations, such as the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and 
the  UK  Council  of  Psychotherapy  who  will  be  better  placed  to  respond  to  your  first 
concern  around 
for  regulation  and  management  of  private 
psychotherapists. 

the  guidelines 

Your second concern raised the need for coordination of NHS mental health services 
and private psychotherapy. The Summary Care Record (SCR) was originally designed 
and communicated to support patients when they receive emergency care. Over time, 
the  significant  value  of  access  to  SCR  to  wider  healthcare  services  has  been 
recognised  and,  as  a  result,  the  SCR  Team  have  worked  with  the  Expert  Advisory 
Committee to extend its use into multiple other care settings through a governance 
framework into which patients and professionals contribute.  

The SCR Team at NHS England have done significant work with a number of private 
sector  organisations,  including  a  range  of  private  hospitals  and  privately  funded 
healthcare  services  trialling  the  use  of  SCRs  within  settings  where  they  have 
previously been unavailable. This work will continue throughout 2024. It is difficult to 
define  precisely  what  is  included  within  private  hospitals  and  privately  funded 
healthcare  services.  However,  all  private  hospitals  and  independent  healthcare 
services  that  have  approached  NHS  England  to  date seeking  access  to  SCR  have 
either  been  onboarded  into  the  existing  proof  of  concepts  or  there  have  been 
discussions with the requestors regarding initial setup and their use for access to SCR. 
Learnings will be reported back to an Expert Advisory Committee to better understand 
any benefits realised but also any potential unintended consequences.  

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 The  SCR  Team  will  work  with  the  Expert  Advisory  Committee  to  seek  full  rollout 
approval within the independent/private sector and consider the scope of this approval 
and  any  specific  exclusions,  constraints,  or  caveats.  We  already  have  full  rollout 
approval  for  Mental  Health  Services  within  the  NHS,  which  would  include 
psychotherapists  working  within  these  services.  However,  we  have  not  yet  been 
approached by organisations representing private psychotherapists.  

Work is also in progress to review the interface between the NHS and non-NHS funded 
independent health providers. This work is in its infancy, but NHS England can provide 
an  update  to  the  coroner  in  due  course.  We  understand  that  the  CQC  are  also 
undertaking work regarding standards for online care and exploring opportunities for 
better  sharing  of  information  both  into  private  sector  providers  and  receiving 
information back to the patient’s registered GP practice from private providers.  

Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Trust have developed guidelines to ensure all 
staff are aware of their responsibility to work collaboratively and share information with 
private providers. It is the responsibility of all providers and commissioners of health 
and  social  care  in  England  to  share  information,  when  it  is  likely  to  facilitate  the 
provision of health or social care to an individual and when it is in the individual’s best 
interests,  as  set  out  in  the  Health  and  Social  Care  (Safety  and  Quality)  Act  2015 
(England).  

The  responsibility  of  professionals  to  communicate  and  share  relevant  clinical 
information  is  also  included  in  several  professional  regulatory  body  guidelines.  The 
Health and Care Professionals Council’s (HCPC) Standard of Conduct Performance 
and Ethics 2.6 states that ‘You must share relevant information, where appropriate, 
with colleagues involved in the care, treatment or other services provided to a service 
user’.  Additionally,  the  General Medical  Council,  Professional  Standards  of  Doctors 
(Domain  3  –  Contributing  to  continuity  of  care)  states  ‘You  must  promptly  share  all 
relevant  information  about  patients  (including  any  reasonable  adjustments  and 
communication  support  preferences)  with  others  involved  in  their  care,  within  and 
across teams, as required’. 

I would also like to provide further assurances on national NHS England work taking 
place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are discussed 
by  the  Regulation  28  Working  Group,  comprising  Regional  Medical  Directors,  and 
other clinical and quality colleagues from across the regions. This ensures that key 
learnings and insights around preventable deaths are shared across the NHS at both 
a national and regional level and helps us pay close attention to any emerging trends 
that may require further review and action.   

Thank you for bringing these important patient safety issues to my attention and please 
do not hesitate to contact me should you need any further information.  

Yours sincerely,  

  
 
 National Medical Director
Response from UK Council for Psychotherapy (PDF)
Karen  Henderson 
HM Assistant Coroner for West Sussex 
HM  Coroner's Court 
Station Approach 
Woking 
Surrey 
GU22 7AP 

2 May 2024 

Dear Dr Henderson 

Response to Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths 

This is the UKCP's response to your report dated 15 March 2024, made under paragraph 7(1) of 
Schedule 5 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 following the death of Sarah  Louise Sutherland. 

As the Chief Executive of UKCP,  I would like to express my deepest condolences to Sarah's family and 
friends. 

Thank you for your investigation and  identification of the concerns in your report set out below. 

1.  Guidelines for regulation and  management of private psychotherapists 

We thought it would be  helpful if we set out our role and  regulatory responsibility.  We  hold a national 
register of psychotherapists and  psychotherapeutic counsellors. The main purpose of the UKCP 
Register is to protect the public, and to provide public confidence in the profession we  regulate. Only 
therapists who meet our exacting standards and training requirements can  be on our Register. Our 
Register is  accredited by the Professional Standards Authority. 

We have a Complaints and Conduct Process (CCP)  which provides a centralised and transparent 
process for considering complaints or concerns by members of the public and clients about therapists 
in relation to their clinical practice. We will investigate cases where there is evidence that calls into 
question a therapist's suitability to be on our Register and indicate a breach of UKCP's code of ethics 
and  professional practice. UKCP regularly receives complaints about UKCP  registrants from the NHS 
and third parties (non-clients) and these are  processed under the CCP.  We  have  not received  a formal 
complaint about Sarah's private psychotherapist. Complaints must normally be  made within 3 years of 
the conduct complained of. The time frame for considering a complaint under the CCP varies 
depending on the nature of the complaint, the documentary evidence and  number of witnesses. 
Please  note that if UKCP commences an  investigation pursuant to the CCP  about a registrant-the 
investigation is confidential. However, if there is an  Interim Suspension Order imposed and/or the 
matter is referred to an  independent Adjudication Panel - this will be  published on the UKCP  website, 
and the Adjudication Panel  hearing is open to the public. UKCP will publish details of any complaint 
upheld on  its website in accordance with the UKCP  Publication of Decisions Policy. 

In view of the above, UKCP does not propose to take any action in relation to this concern. 

 
 2.  Proactive need for co-ordination of NHS mental health services and Private Psychotherapy 

We  note that Surrey and  Borders NHS  Foundation Trust have introduced a 'standard process for 
communication with private providers of psychological therapies' where client consent is obtained. 

We are working closely with the Professional Standards Authority and  the NHS  in discussing 
opportunities for collaboration in support of suicide prevention strategies. 

Yours sincerely, 

Chief Executive 

UKCP 
2nd  Floor.  /\merica  House  T  C20  7014  9955 
F: 020  7014 9977 
2 /\merica Square 
E: info@ukcp.org.uk 
London  EC3N  2LU 

Registered  Charity No.  1058545 
Company No  3258939 
Registered  in  England

Related reports

Other reports by Karen Henderson

See all →

More reports categorised “Suicide (from 2015)”

See all →

Track Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Surrey and Borders Partnership 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.