Recurring concern

Unsafe confidentiality and information-sharing arrangements in service mental health care

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 12 May 2014•Latest report 29 Nov 2024

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes deficiencies in the dedicated confidentiality, independence or safety-information-sharing arrangements of service mental health care where those arrangements may suppress risk disclosure or prevent necessary communication of mental-health risk to relevant families, carers, clinicians or authorities.

Not included

  • Excludes generic information-sharing or communication failures that are not specifically tied to confidentiality or independence in service mental health care.
  • Excludes ordinary clinical confidentiality concerns where no safety-relevant disclosure, risk reporting or protective information-sharing issue is identified.
  • Excludes failures of police, social-care or other non-mental-health information systems unless the assertion directly concerns confidentiality arrangements in service mental health care.
  • Excludes generic mental-health treatment, assessment or care-planning deficiencies that do not concern the confidentiality and information-sharing boundary.
Reports
10

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
11

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2014–2024

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
10

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Department of Health and Social Care4
NHS England3
Ministry of Defence2
Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry1
East London NHS Foundation Trust1
General Pharmaceutical Council1
Hafod Community Mental Health Team1
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust1
Royal Pharmaceutical Society1
The Company Chemists' Association1
Windsor and Maidenhead Community Mental Health Team1
Wokingham Community Mental Health Team1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Berkshire

    AI-generated summary

    Charlie Anthony OWEN · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Charlie Anthony Owen was found deceased in his room at Combermere Barracks on 11 September 2023, after previously making and aborting two attempts to end his life in the context of relationship breakdown. The inquest identified concerns about inadequate sharing of risk-management information, insufficient consideration of welfare checks and protective factors on his return to barracks, and gaps in Army training and Vulnerability Risk Management processes.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to share protective factors and safety actions with the Chain of Command

    Wider context from the report

    “I was concerned to hear that when a risk management and safety plan has been prepared by the Defence mental health services the information contained about relevant protective factors and safety actions is not necessarily shared with the Chain of Command. There is no prompt on the relevant template to remind of team of the potential benefit of sharing this information or requesting consent from the individual in question to do so which gives rise to a concern that this important information is not shared. ”

    Source location

    Charlie Anthony OWEN · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Review the Army’s Vulnerability Risk Management policy and amend associated templates to improve risk-plan recording and sharing.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The policy that supports the Army’s VRM Process is currently undergoing a comprehensive review. The plan is to reissue the policy by the end of March 2025. I expect this to further improve the process, while also making it easier to understand and action.”

    Source location

    Response from Ministry of Defence
    Page 1 · response
    Published 6 December 2024

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Consider directing units on information to capture, record, share and retain during and after case conferences.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Your concern about the adequacy of record keeping and the sharing of the risk management plan will be factored into the policy review of the Army’s VRM Process and templates will be amended accordingly. Additionally, consideration will be given to directing units on what information should be captured, recorded, shared, and kept, during and after case conferences.”

    Source location

    Response from Ministry of Defence
    Page 2 · response
    Published 6 December 2024

    Open published response
  2. Mid Kent and Medway

    AI-generated summary

    Roger Adrian Stevenson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Roger Adrian Stevenson was found deceased in supported accommodation on 2 May 2022, having last been known to be alive on 30 April 2022; the medical cause of death was fatal toxic morphine intoxication. The report identified concerns that Roger had become lost to mental health services, including a lack of follow-up, delays in care-coordinator allocation, insufficient continuity between services, and limited long-term support for cyclical mental ill health.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to clearly record service users' consent to disclosure to family members

    Wider context from the report

    “6. That mental health practitioners did not have means by which to engage with the families of service users, effectively recognising such families as an additional resource able to support mental health treatment by monitoring service users and encouraging them to engage with such treatment (and as an adjunct to that a way of noting that where consent has been given by a service user to disclose matters to family members this is clearly noted so that mental health staff are aware of it and can act promptly in so doing). ”

    Source location

    Roger Adrian Stevenson · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    NHS England is responsible for addressing the report’s concerns about local mental health service issues.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I note that you have also addressed matters of concern to the Chief Executive of NHS England, and I would expect her response to address the concerns raised around local issues.”

    Source location

    Response from Department of Health and Social Care
    Page 1 · response
    Published 21 November 2023

    Open published response
  3. North London

    AI-generated summary

    Callum Wong · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Callum Wong was found having hanged himself on 27 August 2022. The report raised concern about considering exceptions to patient confidentiality in cases of mental ill health where informing third parties could provide crucial non-medical support.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of consideration for exceptions to patient confidentiality in cases of mental illhealth

    Wider context from the report

    “1. Consideration for exceptions to patient confidentiality in cases of mental illhealth, where informing third parties of a patient’s condition may result in crucial non-medical support. ”

    Source location

    Callum Wong · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report
  4. Dorset

    AI-generated summary

    Alexander Charles George Tostevin · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Corporal Alexander Charles George Tostevin died on 18 March 2018 after a significant deterioration in his mental health and while under the care of the Royal Navy Department of Community Mental Health and Welfare Team. A risk management email containing significant disclosures was not seen until the following week, resulting in a missed opportunity to reassess his risk before the weekend. The concerns included the lack of independence of the DCMH, the primacy of its view in multidisciplinary risk assessments, and the absence of a composite risk assessment and care plan.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of independence in service mental health care

    Wider context from the report

    “i. The lack of independence of DCMH risks service users minimising and/or under reporting the risks they may pose to themselves for fear that information may be disclosed to the Chain of Command. If the true extent of the risk of ████████ is not known by DCMH, an effective risk management plan to mitigate the risk of ████████ cannot be formulated. ”

    Source location

    Alexander Charles George Tostevin · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Provide enhanced support through an embedded independent psychiatric nurse.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Unit also receives enhanced support from an embedded, independent, psychiatric nurse- a key asset in promoting mental health and wellbeing. The Unit is also exploring options to increase DCMH endorsed clinical mental health support and dedicated psychologist support. Each squadron has its own General Practitioner supported by a full-time medic. The close relationship between the Chain of Command and medical/welfare practitioners continues to enable any stigma associated with mental health issues to be combated, while also ensuring mental health First Aid measures can be implemented and any referrals made in a timely manner to ensure our SP are effectively supported.”

    Source location

    2021-0407-Response-from-Ministry-of-Defence_Published
    Page 5 · response
    Published 7 December 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    DCMH is independent of Service chains of command, so its structure does not create the identified lack-of-independence risk.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “DCMH operates as an independent organisation, which sits within Defence Primary Healthcare (DPHC), a Tri-Service organisation in UK Strategic Command. Although military DCMH staff² are drawn from the medical services of the Royal Navy (RN), Army and Royal Air Force (RAF), DCMH is independent of all three Service chains of command. Mental health services play a vital Occupational Health role in supporting the Unit and the holistic care of Service personnel. Therefore, a close relationship with an individual’s Chain of Command and DPHC is often a key to ensure the best possible outcome for personnel experiencing mental health issues.”

    Source location

    2021-0407-Response-from-Ministry-of-Defence_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 7 December 2021

    Open published response
  5. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

    AI-generated summary

    SAMANTHA JANE GOULD (Sam) · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Sam took a very large quantity of prescribed medication at home in the early hours of 2 September 2018 and died within at most a couple of hours. The local pharmacy had not been told about a safety plan under which Sam’s parents were responsible for her medication. The report identified a concern that, without national action to ensure pharmacies are involved in medication safety plans for mental health patients aged 16–17, similar fatalities could occur.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure appropriate pharmacy involvement in medication safety plans for mental health patients aged 16–17

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) There did not appear to be any national guidance or standards that directed or encouraged appropriate sharing of risk information and care plans with the local pharmacy. As a result, the pharmacy was unsighted on the fact that the treating psychiatric team had a safety plan involving Sam’s parents being responsible for handling and administering all medication. Had the pharmacy been aware of this plan, it is likely that they would have refused to provide the medication with which Sam overdosed or, at least, contacted Sam’s parents or General Practitioner. (2) A local protocol has now been introduced whereby the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Foundation Trust’s Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service ensures that any pharmacy used regularly by their patients aged 16-17 are (where appropriate) advised of relevant care plans, as well as the responsible GP being so informed. This is now to be part of mandatory training for CAMHS prescribing staff and is to be discussed in the local Joint Prescribing Group to ensure better communication between the local NHS Trusts, G.P.s and local pharmacies. Accordingly, action has already been taken in the local area to prevent similar fatalities. However, (3) I am concerned that there is a risk of future fatalities if action is not taken at a national level to ensure that pharmacies are appropriately involved in medication safety plans for mental health patients aged 16 – 17, given that such patients may otherwise be able to obtain prescribed medication with which to overdose. ”

    Source location

    SAMANTHA JANE GOULD (Sam) · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Establish a working group to develop a national approach to sharing medication-safety information with community pharmacies.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “I have set out in the annex some information that is relevant to this tragic incident and if used appropriately will help us ensure the risk of this tragic incident happening again is minimised. To assist in this I have asked Dr ████████, Deputy Chief Pharmaceutical Officer, to establish a working group to build on the work of the Joint Prescribing Group you mention, with the aim of rolling it out, or an improved approach, across the country within the next 6 months, and then subsequently to ensure that facilities like the Summary Care Record and other digital means are used to their full benefit.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-NHS-England-and-NHS-Improvement_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Continue campaigning for community-pharmacy access to and sharing of patient health records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This is an active area in which the RPS continues to campaign. We believe access and sharing of patient health records for community pharmacies is really important and recognising pharmacists have a legitimate need to access patient health records to improve patient outcomes for patients.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-RPS_Published-1
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Publish a policy and position statement on patient health records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This is an active area in which the RPS continues to campaign. We believe access and sharing of patient health records for community pharmacies is really important and recognising pharmacists have a legitimate need to access patient health records to improve patient outcomes for patients.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-RPS_Published-1
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Work with the General Pharmaceutical Council, Royal Pharmaceutical Society and NHS England to further consider improving practice.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This regulation 28 notice raises an important question about sharing of information and the inclusion of community pharmacy in care planning processes. Whilst neither the CCA nor the Patient Safety Group has legislative authority to change processes, we do share your concerns. We will work with the other organisations identified in your report (the GPhC, RPS and NHS England) to further consider how practice can be improved.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-CCA_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    NHS England is better placed to provide information on national-level medication safety plans.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Also, I note that your report has been sent to NHS England. Whilst we produce guidance and advice of our standards, NHS England may be better placed to provide you information on medication safety plans at a national level.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-GPC_Published
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Mandating local adoption of national protocols across the NHS and other care providers is outside the respondent’s role.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “It would not be within the scope of our role to mandate local changes are adopted across the NHS and by other care providers, however we recognise the need for community pharmacies to be involved in the development of medication safety plans. If changes can be made by the relevant NHS organisations to ensure pharmacy teams are involved in this process, we will raise awareness of this amongst the pharmacy profession.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-RPS_Published-1
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    NHS and CAMHS organisations are responsible for making changes to prevent deaths involving pharmacy communication and medication safety plans.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We believe that there is a need for more system leadership in this area noting that pharmacies are often the recipients of information. This Regulation 28 report has been addressed to pharmacy organisations, and there is parallel need for organisations representing the NHS and CAMMHS services to make changes to prevent deaths.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-RPS_Published-1
    Page 2 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Direct action is outside the remit because the organisation does not operate pharmacies or set standards and guidance for pharmacy operators.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The CCA represents the interests of its members and provides a forum to bring together their knowledge, skills, resources, and experience for the benefit of patients and the NHS. The CCA does not operate any community pharmacies, nor do we set standards or provide guidance for our members or other pharmacy operators. As such we are, unfortunately, not in a position to undertake direct action in this regard.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-CCA_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Changing information-sharing and care-planning processes cannot be undertaken because the relevant organisations lack legislative authority.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “This regulation 28 notice raises an important question about sharing of information and the inclusion of community pharmacy in care planning processes. Whilst neither the CCA nor the Patient Safety Group has legislative authority to change processes, we do share your concerns. We will work with the other organisations identified in your report (the GPhC, RPS and NHS England) to further consider how practice can be improved.”

    Source location

    2021-0186-Response-from-CCA_Published
    Page 1 · response
    Published 2 June 2021

    Open published response
  6. Manchester West

    AI-generated summary

    Rebecca Louise Henry · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Rebecca Louise Henry attempted to kill herself, was assessed in hospital and discharged as a voluntary patient who was considered not detainable. Later that day, she stood in front of an oncoming train; the principal concern was communication between mental health professionals and close relatives, particularly how confidentiality may limit the sharing of potentially valuable information.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to communicate relevant information between mental health care professionals and patients’ close relatives

    Wider context from the report

    “During almost 40 years sitting as a Coroner, Senior Coroner and now Assistant Coroner, I have heard numerous inquests where had there been communication between the doctors, nurses and therapists caring for patients with mental health issues, and the close relatives of those patients, many issues might have been explained and lives saved. The reason given in the present case, as in so many others, is that of patient confidentiality. Whilst the medical authorities are usually right in their interpretation, one wonders whether some form of enquiry/commission might be established to review the law on confidentiality and especially where it interfaces with those patients who have ‘capacity’ but where their relatives have valuable information which could help doctors decide on best care and treatment. ”

    Source location

    Rebecca Louise Henry · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 1 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Work with professional bodies to agree and publish a consensus statement on information sharing and suicide prevention.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Suicide Prevention Strategy for England¹, published in 2012, placed a new emphasis on providing better support to those bereaved or affected by suicide. As part of this, the Department of Health worked with a range of professional bodies to agree a consensus view on confidentiality and suicide prevention. Information sharing and suicide prevention: Consensus statement², was published in 2014, alongside the first annual report of the suicide prevention strategy. The statement includes the following passage:”

    Source location

    2019-0288-Response-by-Department-of-Health-and-Social-Care
    Page 2 · response
    Published 18 October 2019

    Open published response
  7. Wiltshire and Swindon

    AI-generated summary

    Heather Birchall · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Heather Birchall, who was homeless and had mental health problems and alcohol dependence, died after consuming excess amounts of medication alongside alcohol; bronchopneumonia also contributed to the mechanism of death. The principal concern was that healthcare professionals assessing people in police custody might lack relevant mental health information because of confidentiality barriers, potentially limiting informed decisions about further care and safeguarding life.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide healthcare professionals with complete relevant mental-health information for frontline assessments

    Wider context from the report

    “One of the concerns that arose relates to G4S healthcare professionals and any other healthcare professional in this situation when asked to carry out a front line assessment which could include mental health features, that those individuals may not have the fullest amount of information that is available so that they can make an informed decision as to whether or not for example further healthcare input is required, such as an example a formal mental health at assessment. Whilst a problem insofar as getting a complete picture did not seem to be quite such an issue when personnel from LADS were available it would appear that out of those hours, if a G4S healthcare professional wanted to make enquiries insofar as an individual’s mental health background which potentially might be within the knowledge of the relevant healthcare trust, that when an approach is made to the Street Triage team out of hours that more often than not the issue of confidentiality was raised to withhold information or I felt that equally there was a danger that selective information might only be passed at best to the G4S healthcare operative. The concern that I was left with was that the healthcare professionals from G4S and arguably at the end of the day Wiltshire Police who ultimately responsibility it is to safeguard life when an individual is in Police custody are effectively trying to do a job, through their contract service providers (G4S), in circumstances whereby in trying to discharge their duty having regard to Article 2 of European Convention of Human Rights they were doing so effectively, as a consequence of patient confidentiality, with one arm tied behind their back. ”

    Source location

    Heather Birchall · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to share relevant mental-health information between healthcare practitioners and patients’ families

    Wider context from the report

    “It is my view in relation to other hearings that confidentiality can equally pose a problem insofar as communications between healthcare practitioners on the mental health side and a patient’s family. Either of which may have relevant information that would have been of benefit to the other and in respect of which could prevent the loss of life through self-harm and suicide. Whilst the issue of confidentiality should be respected I am concerned that consideration needs to be given to redressing and practical exceptions to that general principle especially if the aim is with a view to safeguarding life. ”

    Source location

    Heather Birchall · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
  8. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Henry James Heselton · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Henry James Heselton died by hanging in a field off Down Lane, Guildford, on 28 September 2016. The report identified concerns about unclear electronic mental health records and poor communication between mental health teams and his general practitioner, which meant relevant information was not available to inform clinical judgement.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to share relevant recent mental health information between mental health teams and general practitioners

    Wider context from the report

    “2. There was a lack of communication between the mental health teams and the general practitioner. The fact that contact had been made by ████████ with both the acute and community mental health team was not shared with his General Practitioner. This left her without relevant recent history to inform her clinical judgement when she was contacted by ████████ on the 7th September 2016. ”

    Source location

    Henry James Heselton · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Develop GP access to mental health records.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Electronic communication has being developed to allow access to CHIE (formerly the Hampshire Health Record) and GP summary patient records and is being developed to allow access for GPs to the mental health record. But this does not mean that communication described above will be superseded.”

    Source location

    2018-0152-Response-by-Southern-Health-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 July 2018

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Embed GP communication requirements in acute and community mental health team procedures, instruct managers, and monitor compliance after referral triage.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “To address the shortcomings in the care provided to Mr Heselton, these principles have been included in the review of the Acute Mental Health Team and Community Mental Health Team Standard Operating Procedures, and the team managers instructed to ensure that staff are aware of the requirement to communicate with GPs after triaging referrals and to regularly monitor that it is occurring.”

    Source location

    2018-0152-Response-by-Southern-Health-NHS-Trust
    Page 2 · response
    Published 8 July 2018

    Open published response
  9. Inner North London

    AI-generated summary

    Chentoоri Chanthirakumar · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Chentoоri Chanthirakumar, a 24-year-old medical student, died by suicide after being discharged from a period of inpatient mental health treatment. The concerns included the university communicating by email about her examinations rather than arranging a personal meeting, and mental health staff not fully absorbing concerns raised by others because of confidentiality concerns.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to distinguish receiving and acting on third-party concerns from disclosing patient details

    Wider context from the report

    “After the medical school was alerted to Ms Chanthirakumar’s illness by two of her friends on 17 June 2015, a senior lecturer working in student support services (and, as it happens, herself a general practitioner) rang Globe Ward of Mile End Hospital and spoke to a treating nurse. Her intention in making this call was to deliver information, most specifically to relay concerns that Ms Chanthirakumar was not being wholly open with staff about the extent of her distress. However, such was the ward nurse’s anxiety not to breach patient confidentiality, the conversation was not as meaningful or as productive as it might otherwise have been. It seems to me that nurses and doctors working in mental health particularly, would benefit from a reminder of the difference between absorbing (and, if appropriate, acting upon) concerns raised by a patient’s relatives, friends, tutors etc., and divulging a patient’s private details. ”

    Source location

    Chentoоri Chanthirakumar · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report
  10. Inner West London

    AI-generated summary

    Keiran Michael John Toman · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Keiran Michael John Toman had fixed delusions, withdrew from social and psychiatric support, and subsequently starved himself to death due to paranoia before being found deceased in a hotel. The report raised concerns that psychiatric services did not maintain contact with his family despite his lack of insight and capacity, potentially leaving him isolated and increasing the risk of deterioration and death.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to appropriately challenge decisions by patients with insufficient insight not to share information with families

    Wider context from the report

    “(1) That some psychiatric staff and services may effectively collude with patients by acquiescing to requests not to pass on information to their families, when these decisions are taken by patients who have insufficient insight to make them. ”

    Source location

    Keiran Michael John Toman · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026