Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Amber Walker

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0528, written 21 Oct 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report21 Oct 2025
Reference2025-0528
DeceasedAmber Walker
CoronerBrendan Allen
Coroner areaDorset
CategoryOther related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

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 used after an inquest. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1)  Secretary of State for Health And Social Care 

1  CORONER 

I am Brendan Joseph Allen, Area 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  25th  April  2023,  an  investigation  was  commenced  into  the  death  of 

Amber Grace Walker, born on the 2nd November 2000. 

The investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on the 7th October 2025. 

The Medical Cause of Death was: 

1a Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy 

1b  

1c  

2   

The  conclusion  of  the  Inquest  recorded  that  Amber  Grace  Walker  died  as  a 

consequence of natural causes. 

4  CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Amber  Grace  Walker  had  a  past  medical  history  that  included  epilepsy,  for 

which she was prescribed lamotrigine and topiramate, and attention deficit and 

hyperactivity disorder. In August 2022 Amber experienced a cluster of seizures 

and was taken to hospital, where she had a further seizure. As a consequence 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 she spoke with an epilepsy nurse specialist in November 2022 and had a face-

to-face consultation with a consultant neurologist on 8th March 2023. Amber 

had experienced two further seizures in the month prior to the consultation. 

Amber declined an increase in her topiramate medication. An increase in her 

medication may have reduced the risk of further seizures, which, in turn, may 

have  decreased  Amber’s  risk  of  Sudden  Unexpected  Death  in  Epilepsy 

(“SUDEP”).  There  was  no  discussion  in  the  consultation  about  SUDEP  and 

Amber's increased risk, given her uncontrolled generalised tonic-clonic seizures 

that she experienced at night. Amber was found deceased in her bedroom at 

her  home  address  on  19th  April  2023,  having  been  well  when  last  seen  at 

around  midnight.  A  post  mortem  examination  revealed  the  medical  cause  of 

death was Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (“SUDEP”).  

5  CORONER’S CONCERNS 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:   

1.  During the inquest evidence was heard that: 

i. 

SUDEP is the leading cause of death for patients diagnosed with 

epilepsy.  The  risk  of  death  is  widely  quoted  as  1  in  1,000  of 

those diagnosed  with epilepsy,  but  the individualised risk may 

be  higher  or  lower  depending  on  the  risk  factors  for  the 

particular  patient.  Although  the  mechanism  of  death  from 

SUDEP is not well understood, modifiable risk factors are known, 

and there are measures that can be taken by patients and those 

treating them to mitigate the risk. Patient awareness of SUDEP 

and the measures they can take to mitigate their risk is vital in 

ensuring  patient’s  can  make  informed  choices  about  the 

management of their condition. 

ii. 

Amber’s  mother,  Mrs  Walker,  attended  all  neurology 

appointments  with  Amber.  Mrs  Walker  gave  evidence  that 

Amber’s  family  supported  Amber  in  managing  her  epilepsy, 

including with medication compliance. Mrs Walker explained that 

she only became aware of SUDEP after Amber’s death: the risk 

2 

 
 
 
 
 of  SUDEP  had  not  been  discussed  at  any  neurology 

appointments that Mrs Walker had attended with Amber. Amber 

was  at  increased  risk  of  SUDEP  as  she  was  experiencing 

uncontrolled tonic-clonic seizures at night and she slept alone, 

albeit  in  the  family  home.  An  increase  in  her  medication  may 

have mitigated Amber’s risk of seizures and therefore her risk of 

SUDEP. Although an increase in medication was discussed at the 

consultation  on  8th  March  2023,  Amber  was  not  advised  that 

declining  an  increase  in  her  medication  in  response  to  her 

uncontrolled seizures meant she remained at an elevated risk of 

SUDEP. 

iii. 

The consultant neurologist that saw Amber on 8th March 2023 

gave  evidence  that  conversations  with  patients  surrounding 

SUDEP  are  challenging.  Prior  to  Amber’s  death,  he  was  not 

aware  of  the  “SUDEP  checklist”,  created  by  SUDEP  Action,  a 

charity with the stated aim of stopping preventable deaths from 

epilepsy and that provide support to those who have lost loved-

ones to epilepsy. He explained that he now routinely uses the 

SUDEP checklist, which he finds  a useful tool to introduce the 

subject of SUDEP with a patient. It is not used universally. He 

also explained that there may be a presumption that colleagues 

who  had  seen  a patient  previously  will  have  discussed  SUDEP 

with a patient, negating the need to repeat the conversation. He 

accepted that when meeting a patient for the first time, or when 

the risk of SUDEP has changed, SUDEP must be discussed with 

a patient. He also explained that in his medical training, SUDEP 

was not taught. This is significant  as there were opportunities 

for other medical professionals to raise SUDEP with Amber, for 

example,  her  GP  and  the  Emergency  Department  medical 

professionals she saw in August 2022. 

2.  I have concerns with regard to the following: 

3 

 
 
 
 i. 

Doctors  can  be  reluctant  to  discuss  SUDEP  with  patients  and/or 

presume  it  is  a  discussion  that  has  been  had  at  previous 

appointment(s) with colleagues that does not need repeating. There 

are tools, such as the SUDEP Action-produced “SUDEP Checklist”, 

that  can  facilitate  such  a  discussion,  but  they  are  not  used 

universally.  The  SUDEP  Checklist  can  be  used  by  any  medical 

practitioner who may come into contact with a patient with epilepsy. 

Discussions  about  SUDEP  ensure  that  patients  are  aware  of  the 

general risks of SUDEP, the risks that are specific to the patient and 

the measures that can be taken to mitigate the risk.  

ii. 

SUDEP is not covered in the medical training of doctors, despite is 

being  the  leading  cause  of  death  in  patients  with  a  diagnosis  of 

epilepsy. It is not only neurologists that will encounter patients with 

epilepsy where a discussion regarding SUDEP may be required, as 

demonstrated by Amber’s experience. 

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, by 16th December 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) 
(2) Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust 

 (Amber’s parents)  

I have also sent it to SUDEP Action and the Epilepsy Society who may find it 
useful or of interest. 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.  

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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 

21st October 2025 

Signed

Brendan J Allen  

5

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 Department of Health and Social Care (PDF)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State  
for Public Health and Prevention 

39 Victoria Street 
London 
SW1H 0EU 

HM Coroner Brendan J Allen 
Coroner’s Office for the County of Dorset 
BCP Civic Centre 
Bourne Avenue 
Bournemouth  
BH2 6DY 

08 January 2026 

Dear Mr Allen,  

Thank you for the Regulation 28 report of 21 October 2025 sent to the Secretary of State for 
Health  and  Social  Care  about  the  death  of  Amber  Grace  Walker.  I  am  replying  as  the 
Minister with responsibility for long term conditions, including epilepsy. 

Firstly,  I  would  like  to  say  how  saddened  I  was  to  read  of  the  circumstances  of  Amber’s 
death, and I offer my sincere condolences to their family and loved ones. The circumstances 
your report describes are concerning and I am grateful to you for bringing these matters to 
my  attention.  Thank  you  for  the  additional  time  provided  to  the  Department  to  provide  a 
response to the concern/s raised in the report 

The report raises concerns over:  

•  The risk of SUDEP (approx. 1 in 1,000) was not explained to Amber despite 

uncontrolled nocturnal seizures. Declining an increase in medication was not linked to 
an elevated SUDEP risk during clinical consultations. Increasing Amber’s medication 
could have reduced seizure frequency and SUDEP risk. No advice was given on the 
implications of refusing medication adjustment.  

•  Amber  and  her  mother  were  unaware  of  SUDEP  until  after  her  death.  Doctors  may 

assume SUDEP has been discussed previously and avoid repeating it.  

•  SUDEP is not routinely covered in medical training, including for non-neurologists.  

In preparing this response, my officials have made enquiries with NHS England to ensure 
we adequately address your concerns. 

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for  
producing clinical guidance for health and care practitioners. Their guidance on Epilepsies 
in  children,  young  people,  and  adults  (NG127)  sets  out  best  practice  for  diagnosis  and 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
  
 management  of  epilepsy  and  includes  specific  recommendations  on  reducing  the  risk  of 
epilepsy-related death, including SUDEP. 

The key points raised in the guidance are: 

Risk  Awareness:  Clinicians  should  be  aware  that  epilepsy  carries  an  increased  risk  of 
premature death, including SUDEP. Potentially modifiable risk factors include uncontrolled 
seizures, non-adherence to medication, alcohol or drug misuse, and having seizures during 
sleep without supervision.  

Discussion with Patients and Families: NICE advises that clinicians should discuss the 
individual  risk  of  epilepsy-related  death,  including  SUDEP,  with  people  diagnosed  with 
epilepsy  from  the  time  of  diagnosis  and  revisit  this  during  ongoing  care.  Conversations 
should cover individual risk factors, such as uncontrolled seizures, missed medication, and 
nocturnal  seizures,  and  provide  practical  advice  on  reducing  these  risks.  This  approach 
ensures patients and families are fully informed and able to take steps that improve safety 
and reduce the likelihood of SUDEP 

Specific  Guidance  for  Sleep  Seizures:  For  people  who  have  seizures  during  sleep, 
clinicians  should  provide  information  on  minimising  risks,  such  as  taking  medication  as 
prescribed, and consider discussing night-time supervision options (e.g., monitors). 

Medication Adherence: NICE emphasises that uncontrolled seizures significantly increase 
the  risk  of  SUDEP.  Supporting  patients  to  take  their  medication  as  prescribed  is  a  key 
intervention to reduce this risk. 

These recommendations are designed to ensure that patients and families are informed and 
supported  to  reduce  risks  wherever  possible.  NICE  guidance  is  not  mandatory  but 
represents evidence-based best practice, and healthcare professionals are expected to take 
it fully into account when planning care. 

Further details can be found in the full guideline on the NICE website at the following link:  
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng217 

NHS  England’s  RightCare  Programme  has  developed  an  Epilepsy  Toolkit,  which  is 
designed to support commissioners and clinicians in improving epilepsy care and reducing 
preventable  deaths.  The  Toolkit  supports  conversations  about  SUDEP  by  making  risk 
reduction  a  core  priority  within  its  guidance.  It  advises  commissioners  and  clinicians  to 
embed  structured  risk  assessments  into  care  pathways  and  encourages  proactive 
discussions  with  patients  about  SUDEP  and  other  epilepsy-related  risks.  The  toolkit 
signposts  to  resources  such  as  the  SUDEP  &  Seizure  Safety  Checklist  and  professional 
training modules, ensuring clinicians have practical tools and confidence to address SUDEP 
openly and consistently. This approach aligns with NICE recommendations and promotes 
informed decision-making to improve patient safety. 

Further details can be found at the following link: https://www.england.nhs.uk/rightcare/wp-
content/uploads/sites/40/2020/03/rightcare-epilepsy-toolkit-v2.pdf 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Health  Education  England,  now  part  of  NHS  England,  has  also  developed  an  Epilepsy 
Programme in collaboration with SUDEP Action, which is designed to strengthen knowledge 
and  confidence  among  healthcare  professionals,  particularly  those  who  are  not  epilepsy 
specialists, in managing epilepsy safely and reducing risks such as SUDEP  

The  Programme  includes  evidence-based  training  modules  delivered  through  the  NHS 
England e-Learning for Healthcare platform, which ensures flexible access for professionals 
across primary and secondary care settings. These modules provide practical guidance on 
diagnosing  and  managing  epilepsy,  supporting  medication  adherence,  and  addressing 
special management issues and are aligned with NICE guideline NG217 and incorporate 
best practice for risk reduction.  

The training emphasises SUDEP risk factors and equips clinicians with strategies to discuss 
these risks sensitively with patients and families. This supports NICE’s recommendation that 
clinicians should explain SUDEP risk from diagnosis onwards and revisit the conversation 
during ongoing care. 

By  improving  awareness  and  clinical  confidence,  the  Epilepsy  Programme  contributes  to 
safer  care,  better  patient  engagement,  and  reduced  variation  in  epilepsy  management 
across the NHS. 

The SUDEP & Seizure Safety Checklist, developed by SUDEP Action, is recognised as an 
important tool for improving epilepsy safety and reducing the risk of SUDEP, and has been 
incorporated  by  NHS  England  into  several  key  commissioning  and  clinical  guidance 
frameworks,  primarily  to  improve  safety  for  vulnerable  groups  and  standardise  risk 
communication. 

The aforementioned NHS RightCare Epilepsy Toolkit highlights the Checklist as a practical 
tool to support structured risk assessments and conversations about SUDEP. It encourages 
commissioners  and  clinicians  to  embed  the  checklist  into  care  pathways  to  identify 
modifiable  risk  factors  and  improve  patient  safety,  aligning  with  NICE  guidance  on 
discussing SUDEP from diagnosis onwards. 

Similarly, the Checklist is featured in e-learning modules on the NHS England e-Learning 
for Healthcare platform. These modules equip clinicians with practical skills to use the 
checklist and hold sensitive conversations about SUDEP risk. 

The National Bundle of Care for Children and Young People with Epilepsy recommends the 
use of structured risk assessment tools, including the Checklist, to support conversations 
about SUDEP. It advises clinicians to incorporate the checklist into routine care to identify 
modifiable  risk  factors,  improve  safety  planning,  and  ensure  families  receive  consistent, 
evidence-based information on reducing SUDEP risk. 

The  Checklist  has  also  been  integrated  into  the  Clive  Treacey  Safety  Checklist.  This 
Checklist was developed following the independent review into the death of Clive Treacey, 
to improve epilepsy care for people with a learning disability and/or autism. Its purpose is to 
provide commissioners and providers with a structured framework to identify and mitigate 
risks associated with epilepsy, ensuring safer care for vulnerable groups. Evidence shows 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 that individuals with a learning disability or autism are at higher risk of SUDEP due to factors 
such  as  complex  health  needs,  communication  challenges,  and  reliance  on  carers  for 
medication and seizure monitoring. By embedding systematic risk assessment and safety 
planning, the Clive Treacey Checklist helps ensure that SUDEP risk is discussed, modifiable 
factors are addressed, and care teams take proactive steps to prevent avoidable deaths. 

In relation to the education and training of doctors, individual medical schools set their own 
undergraduate medical curriculum. These have to meet the standards set by the General 
Medical Council (GMC), which monitors and checks to make sure that the standards are 
maintained.  

The  curricula  for  postgraduate  specialty  training  are  set  by  individual  royal  colleges  and 
faculties,  and  the  GMC  approves  curricula  and  assessment  systems  for  each  training 
programme. Whilst not all curricula may necessarily highlight a specific condition, they all 
nevertheless emphasise the skills and approaches a doctor must develop in order to ensure 
accurate and timely diagnoses and treatment plans for their patients.  

Doctors are ultimately responsible for keeping their clinical knowledge up to date and for 
identifying their learning needs as part of their continuous professional development. They 
should regularly review emerging research and developments in clinical guidance, such as 
that  produced  by  NICE,  to  ensure  they  can  continue  to  provide  high-quality  care  to  all 
patients.    

All doctors registered in the UK are expected to meet the professional standards set out in 
the GMC’s Good Medical Practice. In 2012, the GMC introduced revalidation, which 
supports doctors in regularly reflecting on how to develop or improve their practice. This 
process helps ensure doctors remain up to date, gives patients confidence in their care 
and promotes improved clinical governance.    

I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention. 

Yours sincerely,

Related reports

Other reports by Brendan Allen

See all →

More reports categorised “Other related deaths”

See all →

Track Brendan Allen

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Brendan Allen, 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.