Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2026

Louis Saunders

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0130, written 27 Feb 2026. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report27 Feb 2026
Reference2026-0130
DeceasedLouis Saunders
CoronerLaura Bradford
Coroner areaEast Sussex
CategoryMental Health 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

NOTE:   This form is to be used after an inquest.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1

2

3

4

1  NHS England

CORONER

I am Laura BRADFORD, Senior Coroner for the coroner area of East Sussex Coroners

Service

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.

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On  10  October  2024  I  commenced  an  investigation  into  the  death  of  Louis  Robert

SAUNDERS aged 23.  The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 25 February

2026.   The conclusion of the inquest was that:

Louis  Robert  Saunders  was  diagnosed  with  Attention  Deficit  Hyperactivity  Disorder
(“ADHD”)   in   October   2022.   Louis   was   under   the   care   of   a   private   ADHD   clinic   and   was
started  on  medication  and  once  stabilised,  his  care  was  transferred  to  his  NHS  GP.  Louis
experienced   negative   side   effects   from   his   medication,   including   suicidal   ideation   and   in
June  2024  he  mentioned that  he  had  thoughts  of  travelling  to  cliffs  in  East  Sussex.  It is
understood following this, Louis stopped taking his medication and there was no medication
found in his system following his death. On 31 July 2024, Louis contacted his health insurer
to   be   referred   for   further   therapy   (having   previously   found   it   beneficial)   and   he   was
awaiting assessment. In the months following,  Louis continued to receive privately funded
therapy  and  during  this  time  his   behaviour  was   noted   to   be   changeable.  On  8  October,
Louis made a further call to his insurer to query about therapy and a follow-up appointment
was arranged. On 9 October 2024, Louis travelled from his home address in London to the
East   Sussex   coast,  arriving   at  09:30.   Later   that   evening   his   car  was  found  parked  in   a
layby.   The   following   morning,   a   backpack   was   found   on   the   cliff   edge   which   contained
Louis’ belongings and a search was undertaken. Louis’ body was found at the base of the
cliff  below  the  area  where  the   backpack  was  found  and   his   death  was  confirmed   at  the
scene (on 10 October 2024 at 10:21).

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
Louis   was   diagnosed   with   Attention   Deficit   Hyperactivity   Disorder   (“ADHD”)   in   October
2022. He was diagnosed by a private ADHD clinic and was started on medication by that
clinic.  Once  stabilised,  his  care  was  transferred  to  his  NHS  GP  under  a  shared  care
agreement. Louis experienced negative side effects from his medication, including suicidal
ideation and in June 2024 he mentioned that he had thoughts of travelling to cliffs in East
Sussex. It is understood following this, Louis stopped taking his medication and there was
no   medication   found   in   his   system   following   his   death.   Between   July  2024   and   October
2024, Louis had contact with both his NHS GP and multiple private therapy providers, he
received  Eye  Movement  Desensitization  and  Reprocessing  ("EMDR")  treatment  and
contacted his health insurer to seek talking therapy during this time. On 9 October 2024,
Louis   travelled   from   his   home   address   in   London   to   the   East   Sussex   coast,   arriving   at
09:30. Later that evening his car was found parked in a layby. The following morning, a

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 backpack was found on the cliff edge which contained Louis’ belongings and a search was
undertaken.   Louis’   body   was   found   at   the   base   of   the   cliff   below   the   area   where   the
backpack was found and his death was confirmed at the scene.

5

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the investigation my inquiries 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:
(brief summary of matters of concern)

Whilst it is understood that Louis had stopped taking his medication due to a perceived
increase in suicidal ideation, and no medication was found in his system following his death,
the evidence identified that he was being prescribed ADHD medication by both his NHS GP
and the private ADHD clinic. Neither organisation was aware of the other’s ongoing
prescribing until the time of the inquest.

After Louis’ ADHD treatment was transferred to his GP, the plan was for the surgery to
continue issuing his medication. Accordingly, on 6 November 2023, the surgery issued a
prescription for Lisdexamfetamine ([REDACTED]). However, Louis had attended an
appointment
at the ADHD clinic the previous day, on 5 November 2023, and the clinic’s notes record that
he was to continue on Dexamfetamine ([REDACTED]). Although the medications
have similar names, they are distinct drugs with different dosing requirements. Effective
management and titration are understood to be essential to ensure therapeutic benefit and
limit adverse effects.

The concern that has arisen relates to continuity of care between private providers and the
NHS once a patient has been diagnosed with ADHD, commenced on medication, and
subsequently transferred to GP care. In Louis’ case, communication between the private
sector and the NHS was insufficiently clear, and the situation became more complex when
he continued to be seen by both the ADHD clinic and his GP. This created opportunities for
key information to be missed.

Although medication was not directly implicated in Louis’ death, there remains a risk that a
patient may inadvertently obtain duplicate prescriptions or become confused about which
medication to take. Such scenarios may pose a risk of future deaths. As increasing numbers
of patients are receiving ADHD diagnoses and commencing treatment in the private sector
due to long NHS waiting times, I am concerned about the robustness of current processes
to ensure safe and continuous care following transfer to a GP.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or

your organisation) have the power to take such action.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,

namely by April 24, 2026.   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.

COPIES and PUBLICATION

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to Louis’ family and the following

6

7

8

Interested Persons:



[REDAC
TED]

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

  Nuffield Health Wellbeing Service

I have also sent it to the following who may find it useful or of interest:

[REDACTED]– ADHD Taskforce
 Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Royal Pharmaceutical Society

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 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 by the Chief Coroner.

9

Dated: 27/02/2026

Laura BRADFORD
Senior Coroner for
East Sussex Coroners Service

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

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 NHS England (PDF)
Ms Laura Bradford 
Senior Coroner  
East Sussex Coroner's Court and Office 
Westfield House 
St Anne's Crescent 
Lewes 
BN7 1UE 

Medical Director for Mental Health & 
Neurodiversity
NHS England 
Wellington House
133-155 Waterloo Road 
London
SE1 8UG

17th April 2026

Dear Coroner, 

Re:  Regulation 28 Report  to  Prevent  Future Deaths  –  Louis Robert  Saunders, 
who died on 10 October 2024 

Thank  you  for  your  Report  to  Prevent  Future  Deaths  (hereafter  “Report”)  dated  27 
February 2026 concerning the death of Louis Robert Saunders on 10 October 2024. 
In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like 
to express my sincere condolences to Louis’ family and loved ones. NHS England are 
keen to assure the family and the coroner that the concerns raised about Louis’ care 
have been listened to and reflected upon. 

ADHD  services  are  a  complex  landscape.  They  are  commissioned  locally  by 
Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) with significant national variation existing in pathways 
and  provision,  including  independent  sector  providers  operating  under  the  Right  to 
Choose framework.   

Your report highlights the potentially serious patient safety risk created by ineffective 
sharing of clinical information between care providers, in this case between a private 
care provider and NHS primary care. I note your reference to a shared care agreement 
(SCA) being put into place between the private provider and Louis’ GP, following his 
diagnosis in October 2022 (“his care was transferred to his NHS GP under a shared 
care agreement”).  

SCAs are formal arrangements supporting the safe sharing or transfer of elements of 
a patient’s ongoing care between, or from, a specialist provider to primary care, where 
this  is  clinically  appropriate  and  agreed  by  all  parties.  Their  purpose  is  to  enable 
patients  to  receive  continuing  care  in  the  community,  while  ensuring  appropriate 
specialist  oversight  is  maintained.  Under  an  SCA,  the  specialist  (in  this  case  the 
private provider) initiates treatment and remains responsible for the overall treatment 
plan, including diagnosis, treatment initiation, and specialist review. The primary care 
prescriber  (in  this  case  Louis’  GP)  may  agree  to  take  on  responsibility  for  routine 
prescribing  and  agreed  monitoring  requirements,  in  line  with  locally  agreed 
arrangements and any national guidance. 

Effective shared care relies on clear communication between the specialist and the 
primary  care  prescriber. The  specialist  is  responsible  for  providing  sufficient  clinical 
information to support safe prescribing and for promptly communicating any changes 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 to the treatment plan, including the outcome of scheduled reviews. The primary care 
prescriber  may  seek  specialist  advice  as  required,  including  where  concerns  arise 
regarding treatment efficacy or adverse effects. 

For medications that require ongoing specialist oversight, such as those used in the 
management of ADHD, SCAs are typically time-limited and subject to regular specialist 
review. Overall clinical accountability for the patients care remains with the specialist, 
while  specific  elements  of  care  are  delivered  under  shared  care  arrangements:  the 
specialist retains responsibility for diagnosis, treatment initiation, specialist review and 
any material changes to the treatment plan, and the GP undertakes agreed aspects 
of prescribing and monitoring in line with the SCA. The patient therefore remains under 
the  care  of both the  specialist  and  the GP throughout.  Where  a material  change to 
treatment is proposed, a revised or new SCA would normally be required, subject to 
the agreement of the GP. 

I  understand  from  your  report  that  the  SCA  was  established  for  the  provision  of 
Lisdexamfetamine  (30mg)  to  Louis,  and  the  first  prescription  issued  by  his  GP,  in 
November 2023. However, concurrently, Louis was reviewed by his specialist and his 
pharmacological treatment changed to Dexamfetamine (5mg, 3 times daily), resulting 
in simultaneous prescriptions. It is not unusual for a brief overlap in prescribing to exist 
when a treatment change occurs in the background of an existing SCA. Normally we 
would anticipate that the private provider (as the responsible specialist) would have 
discussed with Louis that this change of medication meant he should no longer take 
the  Lisdexamfetamine  prescribed  previously  and  communicated  the  change  in 
treatment  plan  to  Louis’  GP,  in  order  that  they  could  discontinue  the  existing 
Lisdexamfetamine prescription.  

We understand the concern that has arisen relates to continuity of care and robustness 
of process between private providers and the NHS once a patient has been diagnosed 
with ADHD,  commenced  on  medication,  and  subsequently  transferred  to  GP  care. 
However, I want to reassure you that it is entirely appropriate for a patient receiving 
ADHD medication via an SCA to remain under the care of their responsible specialist 
alongside their primary care prescriber, due to the need for the responsible specialist 
to retain oversight and manage treatment in line with the evolving needs of the patient. 
I  have  fed  your  concerns  back  to  NHS  England’s  National ADHD  Programme  and 
Primary  Care  Teams,    who  will  ensure  that  the  risks  you  have  raised  of  duplicate 
prescriptions and confusion between current and previous medication regimes,  and 
actions you have identified, including the need for continuity of care and timely and 
effective  communication  of  treatment  changes,  are  highlighted  to  both  specialist 
providers and primary care prescribers wherever possible in their ongoing work.  

NHS England is committed to working with system partners, including commissioners 
and providers of ADHD support, to improve health-related experience and outcomes 
for those with ADHD. We recently published non-mandatory guide prices for ADHD 
assessments  and  treatment  pathways,  alongside  detailed  commissioning  guidance, 
that  will  set  clear  expectations  for  assessment  standards,  data  quality,  clinical 
governance, shared care and follow-up.  

More fundamentally, the government has commissioned an Independent review into 
mental  health  conditions,  ADHD  and  autism to  look  at  the  issues  relating  to 
assessment  and  diagnosis  you  have  raised.  In  parallel  to  the  Review,  we  are also 

 
 
 
 
 
 conducting  an  internal exercise to  understand  current NHS clinical  and  operational 
practice  and  spend  on  mental  health, autism and  ADHD  services. In  addition 
to identifying unwarranted  variation  in  service  models,  we  will  explore  how  we  can 
improve access, productivity and quality of NHS services with a range of experts. To 
inform local commissioning and provision of care, we will use our findings to set out 
clear proposals for the future of mental health, autism and ADHD services. 

It  is  also  important  to  reaffirm  the  national  commitment  to  suicide  prevention.  NHS 
England  and  the  Department  of  Health  and  Social  Care  continue  to  prioritise 
improvements in early identification of suicide risk, safe prescribing, timely access to 
psychological  support  and  joined-up  communication  across  organisations.  These 
priorities  are  reflected  in  the  national  suicide  prevention  strategy,  which  places 
particular  focus  on  young  adults  and  people  with  neurodevelopmental  conditions, 
groups recognised as facing disproportionately high risks.  

Regional Response 

The South East Regional NHS England Team have liaised with the NHS GP practice 
and the private ADHD clinic regarding this case.  

The NHS GP practice have held multiple practice meetings looking at their in-house 
systems  around  SCAs  for  their  patients  with  ADHD.  Through  this  they  identified 
difficulties  with  communication  between  themselves  and  the  private  provider  which 
meant that the practice were not fully aware of what treatment Louis was receiving. 
They also noted difficulties in being able to contact the private clinics due to problems 
both with finding a point of contact and receiving a response. 

The NHS GP practice highlighted that with SCAs used for other medications there is 
a clear standardisation of what is expected from general practice and secondary care. 
They  would  welcome  improved  communication  with  private  providers  and  greater 
clarity around the specifics of an ADHD shared care agreement. 

The Region have liaised with the private ADHD clinic who have advised that they have 
held a formal preventing future deaths review meeting for this case. The result of the 
review  was  that  they  did  not  identify  any  deficiencies  in  their  processes,  nor  any 
changes  required  to  their  current  clinical  practice.  They  highlighted  their  current 
systems ensure continuity of care and safer prescribing which included that following 
every  clinical  interaction,  including  titration,  medication  reviews,  and  shared  care 
reviews,  detailed  written  correspondence  is  issued  to  the  patient’s  GP  to  ensure 
continuity,  transparency,  and  clarity  of  care.  They  clarified  that  they  do  not  initiate 
medication  without  first  obtaining  a  Summary  Care  Record  or  equivalent  clinical 
information from the patient’s GP.  

The Region will be sharing the responses from the NHS GP with the private provider 
and the private providers response with the NHS GP so they are aware of each other’s 
response. If you have any further questions we would advise you address those to the 
private provider directly.   

I  would  also  like  to  provide  further  assurances  on  the  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 events, such as the sad death of Louis, 
are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us to 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,  

Medical Director for Mental Health and Neurodiversity 

NHS England

Related reports

Other reports by Laura Bradford

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.