Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0052, written 31 Jan 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 31 Jan 2025 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2025-0052 |
| Deceased | Alexander Channing |
| Coroner | Richard T Middleton |
| Coroner area | Dorset |
| Category | Suicide (from 2015) · Mental Health related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 3 |
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 usedafter an inquest. REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1. The Vice Chancellor of Arts University Bournemouth 2. The Chief Executive of Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust 3. The Chief Executive of Devon Partnership NHS Trust 1 CORONER I am Richard T Middleton, Assistant Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Dorset 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 1st February 2022, an investigation was commenced into the death of Alexander Kieran Ari Channing (known as Alec), born on the 17th July 2003. The investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on the 18th December 2024. The Medical Cause of Death was: 1a Hanging The conclusion of the Inquest recorded that Alexander Channing died as a consequence of suicide in circumstances where decisions were made at the time of discharge from hospital on 19/1/22 not to involve the Home Treatment Team and to postpone a Community Mental Health Team meeting on 25/1/22 which has led to missed opportunities to reassess his risk of suicide, the last missed opportunity being two days before his death. 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH In 2021 Alec had been diagnosed with Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. He had been detained in hospital under s.2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 between 29/7/21 and 11/8/21. Following discharge he was seen by the Home Treatment Team and then the Community Mental Health Team. There was a delay in the transfer of care from the Community Mental Health Team based where his family lived to the Community Mental Heath Team in his university town. 1 It was believed that the transfer could not take place until he had registered with a GP surgery in his university town. The referral was opened by the new Community Mental Health Team on 24/11/21. Alec was detained in hospital under s.2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 between 7/1/22 and 19/1/22. On discharge a decision was made not to involve the Home Treatment Team. An appointment was fixed for Alec to meet with the Community Mental Health Team on 25/1/22 for an assessment. Alec contracted Covid on or around 25/1/22 and the assessment meeting was postponed as it was deemed necessary for there to be a face to face assessment. On 27/1/22 Alec was found suspended by a ligature in his room at his university halls of residence. Paramedics attended and pronounced him dead at the scene. Dorset Police investigated and found no suspicious circumstances. 5 CORONER’S CONCERNS The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows: 1. During the inquest evidence was heard that: i. ii. iii. iv. The number of students commencing or resuming studies following the Covid 19 pandemic with mental health issues and requiring support from the wellbeing services at Arts University Bournemouth has significantly increased. Alec was to be transferred from the Community Mental Health Team in his home town to the Community Mental Health Team in his university town. The transferring CMHT were unaware that it was possible to arrange a direct transfer to the receiving CMHT without the need for Alec to be first registered with a GP surgery in his university town. Alec was admitted to a district hospital on 7/1/22 and seen by the Liaison Psychiatry Team. Following a decision to discharge Alec from hospital it was decided that a referral to the Home Treatment Team was unnecessary. Alec was discharged to a date provided by the CMHT in his university town. There was no involvement of that CMHT in his discharge planning. Alec had initially indicated that he would consent for information to be shared with others but that consent was withdrawn. There was no pro active approach taken by the CMHT in his home town to seek his consent to share information. 2. I have concerns with regard to the following: i. There is no training provided to the wellbeing services at the Arts University Bournemouth in relation to students diagnosed with Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. 2 ii. iii. iv. There appears to be a failure amongst staff at the Exter CMHT to appreciate that there can be a direct transfer of a patient’s care to another CMHT Trust without the need for a patient to have to first register with a GP surgery There was a lack of involvement of a responsible clinician in the process of discharge planning from the district hospital in Exeter to the care of Bournemouth CMHT at Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. There is no policy in place at Devon Partnership NHS Trust which encourages a repeated proactive approach in seeking consent from a patient to share information at relevant times. 6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion urgent action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and/or 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, 28th March 2025. 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) Alec’s family 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 Dated Signed 31st January 2025 Richard T Middleton 3
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.
Coroner’s Support Officer 5 February 2025 Ref: Alexander Kieran Ari Channing - Prevention of Future Deaths Report (ref: 22815272) Dear Ms Booth On behalf of Arts University Bournemouth, I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 31 January 2025 relating to the Prevention of Future Deaths Report following the inquest touching the death of Alexander Channing. I note the concern raised by HM Coroner: There is no training provided to the wellbeing services at the Arts University Bournemouth in relation to students diagnosed with Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. I confirm to HM Coroner that a full day training session on EUPD and personality disorders was delivered to 17 members of Student Services staff, including Wellbeing Practitioners and Counsellors, on Monday 6 January 2025. Training was provided by is a psychologist and has also trained in postgraduate Psychiatry at Cardiff University School of Medicine. , Senior Partner in Metal Health Training. Full details of the training provided are available at https://mentalhealthtraining.co.uk/the- frontline-training-group/ I trust this action fully addresses the concerns noted in the Prevention of Future Deaths Report. Yours sincerely Director of Student Experience and Employability
CONFIDENTIAL Mr Richard T Middleton Assistant Coroner Dorset Civic Centre Bourne Avenue Bournemouth BH2 6DY Sent via e-mail Dear Mr Middleton, Trust Headquarters Wonford House Dryden Road Exeter EX2 9AF Tel: 01392 208683 Date: 25 March 2025 Re. Mr Alexander Kieran Ari Channing – Regulation 28 report. I write in my capacity as Interim Chief Nursing Officer & Allied Professions Lead for Devon Partnership NHS Trust (DPT) in response to your regulation 28 report dated 31 January 2025. If I can first pass on my condolences to Mr Channing’s family and friends. In your report you highlighted areas of concern to The Vice Chancellor of Arts University Bournemouth, The Chief Executive of Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, along with us Devon Partnership NHS Trust (DPT). In respect to the concerns pertinent to DPT I respond as below: There appears to be a failure amongst staff at the Exeter CMHT to appreciate that there can be a direct transfer of a patient’s care to another CMHT Trust without the need for a patient to have to first register with a GP surgery – Patient transfers to out of area services remain a challenge for all NHS providers. We have an agreed standard operating procedure that articulates the process to collaboratively transition a person between community mental health services from Devon Partnership Trust to another Trust. At times the referring team may still experience local challenges in relation to an out of area transfer, as the policy relates to DPT’s processes only. Details on referring a person to another Trust where they do not yet have a GP can be found on page 6 point 6.6, this is the specific detail, 1. Person without a known Address and/or Registered GP on Transfer 1.1. On occasion a person may not have a known address or registered GP in Devon or part of Devon that is covered by the team the person is transitioning too. This occurs where a person has been placed out of area or temporarily moves (home address) or is in unstable accommodation or is released from prison. The lack of address/changed address or registered GP, should not be the sole reasons for declining a transition or transferring to another team/service whilst in the first 3 - 6 months of the initial transition. If a service, even a monitoring service is offered by a Trust service it is incumbent on the service being transitioned to, to make reasonable adjustments (i.e. allocate to a practitioner/service LEGAL\103850\00092\72630646.v1-3/6/25 72630646v1 regardless of the eventual locality a person may be accommodated or where the GP will be registered) C16_Transitions_Ma r24 (2).docx Where this is the case, transfer will be planned and managed in a sensitive way taking into account an individual’s needs. The existing service keyworker/care coordinator or person identified in the Service Standard Operating Procedure [SOP], will be responsible for management of the transfer and ensuring all communication is clear to the user, referrer and receiving service to ensure that the person receives a seamless service. Until a person’s eligibility for services is determined, there should be no gap in service provision. The current services will continue until either the services the person is transitioning to are in place, or the assessment shows that there are no eligible needs. It should be noted that some services have long waiting lists. A person that is needing to transition to one of these services will have their referral reviewed with the local knowledge and prioritisation for their waiting list status in the service being transitioned to, this service will support the transition when agreed. The services covered by the Policy recognise that smooth transition planning may require collaborative involvement of a potential receiving service for a short period of time before the person becomes eligible for that service, initially in a consultation and liaison capacity. This will allow for adequate planning and hand over, without lengthy periods of uncertainty about what the onward service might look like. In general, this would not be expected to exceed between three to six months ahead, with the longer length for particularly complex cases. e.g. if a person is not eligible for a service until they are aged 18 or 65 or move to within the catchment area of a service, does not mean work on transition should not be undertaken prior to the cut- off point. It is not a case therefore of waiting for 3 months before a key worker is allocated, then a further 3 month wait until the new key worker starts to work with the referred person. The Trust aims to provide high quality, safe and effective services to all patients and recognises the importance of enabling effective continuity of care, particularly at times of transition when patients may be particularly vulnerable. It is important that any required transition process is managed sensitively and collaboratively to support continued engagement of the person and their support networks and safe and effective service delivery. There was a lack of involvement of a responsible clinician in the process of discharge planning from the district hospital in Exeter to the care of Bournemouth CMHT at Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust – In terms of discharge planning from Liaison Psychiatry, in relation to the planned discharge from the district hospital in Exeter, I can confirm that the following paragraph has been added to the Liaison Psychiatry Services Exeter, Torquay and Barnstaple Specialist Services Directorate Standard Operating Procedure. It gives detail on page 12 of the attached document. Page 2 of 4 For people who have been placed under Section 2 or Section 3 within the DGH and the plan is made for discharge to the community (not psychiatric hospital). The agreement is that the Consultant who rescinds the section will consider if 48 hour follow up by Home Treatment Team is required and make that referral prior to discharge. In those cases where this is not required then the rationale will be clearly documented in the patient electronic records. Individuals will be discharged from the service when the objectives and goals of the care and treatment have been met. This may be following an assessment in the Emergency Department or after a period of assessment. We will endeavour to signpost the person using our service to appropriate support in the community as required and liaise with our partner agencies. We do recognise and accept that an individual’s motivation to engage in treatment may vary according to their mental state. If an individual has made a choice not to engage in treatment, then we will aim to signpost them to other appropriate services, unless there is evidence to suggest that their capacity may be impaired, which would then require a capacity assessment to be undertaken. Upon discharge from Liaison Psychiatry a written assessment letter is provided for the patient, to the General Practitioner and, if applicable, the care team that is taking on the care and treatment of the individual. A copy is offered to the individual who is also given a service user satisfaction survey. The individual is also always asked whether they would like their carer or relative to receive a copy. Exeter Torbay and North Devon Liaison Psychiatry Operational policy V2.0 Review ed November 2024.docx Our aim is to ensure good working practices and relationships between the Liaison Psychiatry team and across the Network functions within the Trust and with agencies/services outside the Trust. DPT endeavours to ensure that any transfer of care of patients from the Liaison Psychiatry Team to the appropriate Network function within or outside DPT is managed as rapidly and effectively as possible. There is no policy in place at Devon Partnership NHS Trust which encourages a repeated proactive approach in seeking consent from a patient to share information at relevant times. Devon Partnership NHS Trust has a policy in relation to confidentiality. In the attached policy it states that the person has a right to restrict disclosure to share information. DPT staff members would routinely review a person consent to share information. These reviews of confidentiality should take place when newly allocated to a new worker, identified new risks occur, or periods of transitions between teams. GV03_Confidentiali ty_Procedure_Feb19X (2).docx Page 3 of 4 The person has the right to request restricted disclosure of all or some of their confidential personal information. If such a request is made there should be careful consideration of this and all reasonable attempts to respect their wishes and address their concerns should be made. Explanation of why the sharing is necessary in the particular circumstances should be given and the risks in relation to any restriction. Explicit consent must be received from the person and recorded on their electronic patient records for any sharing of information which is not directly related to their care. For example, someone may wish to have information shared with some family members but not others. It is important to ensure the consent is clearly recorded and understood. The person may change their mind about disclosure at any time before any disclosure is made and afterwards to prevent any further disclosures. If you feel that you need further detail, please do not hesitate to contact me again. Yours Sincerely Interim Chief Nursing Officer & Allied Professions Lead Page 4 of 4
Corporate Office
Sentinel House
4-6 Nuffield Road
Poole, Dorset
BH17 0RB
dorsethealthcare.nhs.uk
01202 277003
2 April 2025
Dear Sir,
Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths following the inquest touching on
the death of Alexander Kieran Ari Channing
I am writing following your letter dated 31st January 2025, following the inquest touching on
the sad death of Alec.
Firstly, I wanted to acknowledge the incredibly sad circumstances of this case. I was so sorry
to hear about Alec’s death, which I can only imagine must be a tragedy which his family and
friends continue to live with. My thoughts are with everyone who knew Alec and with the staff
who worked alongside him.
I acknowledge receipt of the Regulation 28 Report and the concerns you express as the
Assistant Coroner overseeing the inquest, I note specifically the concern in relation to Dorset
HealthCare NHS Foundation Trust ("Dorset Healthcare"):
There was a lack of involvement of a responsible clinician in the process of discharge
planning from the district hospital in Exeter to the care of Bournemouth CMHT at
Dorset Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.
We would like to provide an assurance that Dorset HealthCare is fully committed to learning
and taking any steps necessary to prevent future deaths and we understand the significance
and importance of Regulation 28 Reports.
Having carefully considered the concern described, we have again reviewed the
circumstances of Alec's discharge from Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital (whilst under the
care of Devon Partnership Trust). In terms of what took place, Dorset HealthCare was
unfortunately not involved with discharge planning on this occasion, apart from being
contacted by Devon Partnership Trust to arrange a psychiatric outpatient appointment for
Alec. The normal arrangement between NHS providers is for discharge arrangements to be
led by the team seeking to transfer care. Learning from the circumstances of Alec’s death,
we are seeking to strengthen our relationship with Devon Partnership Trust to ensure that
there are effective and comprehensive discharge pathways between the two organisations.
Whilst we are confident that Dorset HealthCare does have relevant policies and procedures
in place and our usual practice is to engage with discharge plans when patients are being
transferred from areas outside of Dorset, this has been a tragic reminder of the need to
ensure this responsibility is understood by all of our clinicians and managers. We fully
appreciate that we must take all steps possible across the NHS to facilitate the effective and
well managed discharge of patients when they are transferring between services in different
areas.
Following the conclusion of the inquest, feedback was provided at a local level at multi-
disciplinary team meetings in the relevant area, this feedback included the concerns
expressed by the Coroner and the experience of Alec's family.
Learning and Review Groups have been introduced in the Trust, in line with the Patient
Safety Incident Response Framework, introduced in the NHS in 2023. They form part of
Dorset Healthcare's organisational patient safety framework and are intended to share and
disseminate learning across the directorates. Learning will be shared within the Learning and
Review Groups at the next meeting which is scheduled for April 2025. The specific learning
will be around the discharge of patients to and from services outside the Dorset Area.
I hope I have been able to provide reassurance that we have given proper consideration to
your concerns and acted on the learning from this tragic case.
Yours sincerely
Chief Executive
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Suicide (from 2015), 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.