PFD report

Aaron James DEELEY · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 19 Jun 2024•Essex

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
3

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
19

Described in responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised5

  1. Confusing and incomplete policy for placing patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment under 1:1 observation
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pendingPart of recurring concern: Unreliable patient observation arrangements
  2. Lack of a joint protocol for working between the two Trusts on Mental Health Act assessment referrals
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to ensure timely and appropriate Mental Health Act assessmentPart of recurring concern: Unreliable mental health referral pathways
  3. Lack of Responsible Clinician allocation for vulnerable patients held pending Mental Health Act assessment
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to maintain clear clinical responsibility for patient carePart of recurring concern: Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pending
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.11

  1. Action

    Develop a joint EPUT–MSE working protocol defining responsibilities for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  2. Action

    Update and ratify the Mental Health Liaison Service Operational Policy and SOP to address risk management and support for patients awaiting assessment.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  3. Action

    Share the reviewed Mental Health Liaison SOP with all Liaison Team staff to promote awareness and consistent practice.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 26 June 2024.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

  1. Position

    The Acute Trust is responsible for responding to concerns about the regime and policy for one-to-one observation pending Mental Health Act assessment.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Confusing and incomplete policy for placing patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment under 1:1 observation

Wider context from the report

“While a patient is admitted to an acute Trust ward for treatment for physical health treatment and is being held under section 5 (2) Mental Health Act for a Mental Health Act assessment due to concerns the patient presents a risk to themselves or others with a mental disorder, it permits the patient to be held for a maximum period of 72 hours. a. Patients admitted into the Accident & Emergency department detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have a Responsible Clinician allocated. Patients who are not under section have access to the Mental Health Liaison Team. b. Patients admitted onto a ward at the acute Trust detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have an allocated Responsible Clinician. As section 5 (2) is a holding power only, there is no Responsible Clinician allocated for a vulnerable patient being held pending assessment for consideration for detention under the Mental health Act. c. During the waiting period of up to 72 hours, Mental Health Liaison will not attend the acute ward or make assessment of the presenting risks of self-harm. d. The acute care healthcare professionals do not have specialist mental health training to conduct a mental health assessment and the consequential presenting harm. e. There was confusion at the acute Trust as to what regime was required to ensure that a patient awaiting Mental Health Act assessment could be put under 1:1 observation. The Trust policy was confusing and did not cover patients like Aaron Deeley. f. There is no joint protocol to cover the working between the two Trusts on this issue as the referral for Mental Health Act assessment goes outside of both organisations. There is a lacuna for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment and requiring simultaneous physical healthcare when a significant risk has been identified such that a patient may require detention for their own safety. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pending; Unreliable patient observation arrangements.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of a joint protocol for working between the two Trusts on Mental Health Act assessment referrals

Wider context from the report

“While a patient is admitted to an acute Trust ward for treatment for physical health treatment and is being held under section 5 (2) Mental Health Act for a Mental Health Act assessment due to concerns the patient presents a risk to themselves or others with a mental disorder, it permits the patient to be held for a maximum period of 72 hours. a. Patients admitted into the Accident & Emergency department detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have a Responsible Clinician allocated. Patients who are not under section have access to the Mental Health Liaison Team. b. Patients admitted onto a ward at the acute Trust detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have an allocated Responsible Clinician. As section 5 (2) is a holding power only, there is no Responsible Clinician allocated for a vulnerable patient being held pending assessment for consideration for detention under the Mental health Act. c. During the waiting period of up to 72 hours, Mental Health Liaison will not attend the acute ward or make assessment of the presenting risks of self-harm. d. The acute care healthcare professionals do not have specialist mental health training to conduct a mental health assessment and the consequential presenting harm. e. There was confusion at the acute Trust as to what regime was required to ensure that a patient awaiting Mental Health Act assessment could be put under 1:1 observation. The Trust policy was confusing and did not cover patients like Aaron Deeley. f. There is no joint protocol to cover the working between the two Trusts on this issue as the referral for Mental Health Act assessment goes outside of both organisations. There is a lacuna for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment and requiring simultaneous physical healthcare when a significant risk has been identified such that a patient may require detention for their own safety. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure timely and appropriate Mental Health Act assessment; Unreliable mental health referral pathways.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of Responsible Clinician allocation for vulnerable patients held pending Mental Health Act assessment

Wider context from the report

“While a patient is admitted to an acute Trust ward for treatment for physical health treatment and is being held under section 5 (2) Mental Health Act for a Mental Health Act assessment due to concerns the patient presents a risk to themselves or others with a mental disorder, it permits the patient to be held for a maximum period of 72 hours. a. Patients admitted into the Accident & Emergency department detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have a Responsible Clinician allocated. Patients who are not under section have access to the Mental Health Liaison Team. b. Patients admitted onto a ward at the acute Trust detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have an allocated Responsible Clinician. As section 5 (2) is a holding power only, there is no Responsible Clinician allocated for a vulnerable patient being held pending assessment for consideration for detention under the Mental health Act. c. During the waiting period of up to 72 hours, Mental Health Liaison will not attend the acute ward or make assessment of the presenting risks of self-harm. d. The acute care healthcare professionals do not have specialist mental health training to conduct a mental health assessment and the consequential presenting harm. e. There was confusion at the acute Trust as to what regime was required to ensure that a patient awaiting Mental Health Act assessment could be put under 1:1 observation. The Trust policy was confusing and did not cover patients like Aaron Deeley. f. There is no joint protocol to cover the working between the two Trusts on this issue as the referral for Mental Health Act assessment goes outside of both organisations. There is a lacuna for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment and requiring simultaneous physical healthcare when a significant risk has been identified such that a patient may require detention for their own safety. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to maintain clear clinical responsibility for patient care; Failure to provide safe interim mental health care while assessment, detention or inpatient placement is pending.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of specialist mental health training among acute care healthcare professionals for mental health assessment

Wider context from the report

“While a patient is admitted to an acute Trust ward for treatment for physical health treatment and is being held under section 5 (2) Mental Health Act for a Mental Health Act assessment due to concerns the patient presents a risk to themselves or others with a mental disorder, it permits the patient to be held for a maximum period of 72 hours. a. Patients admitted into the Accident & Emergency department detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have a Responsible Clinician allocated. Patients who are not under section have access to the Mental Health Liaison Team. b. Patients admitted onto a ward at the acute Trust detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have an allocated Responsible Clinician. As section 5 (2) is a holding power only, there is no Responsible Clinician allocated for a vulnerable patient being held pending assessment for consideration for detention under the Mental health Act. c. During the waiting period of up to 72 hours, Mental Health Liaison will not attend the acute ward or make assessment of the presenting risks of self-harm. d. The acute care healthcare professionals do not have specialist mental health training to conduct a mental health assessment and the consequential presenting harm. e. There was confusion at the acute Trust as to what regime was required to ensure that a patient awaiting Mental Health Act assessment could be put under 1:1 observation. The Trust policy was confusing and did not cover patients like Aaron Deeley. f. There is no joint protocol to cover the working between the two Trusts on this issue as the referral for Mental Health Act assessment goes outside of both organisations. There is a lacuna for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment and requiring simultaneous physical healthcare when a significant risk has been identified such that a patient may require detention for their own safety. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate competence in mental health assessment.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of Mental Health Liaison to attend acute wards and assess presenting self-harm risks during the assessment waiting period

Wider context from the report

“While a patient is admitted to an acute Trust ward for treatment for physical health treatment and is being held under section 5 (2) Mental Health Act for a Mental Health Act assessment due to concerns the patient presents a risk to themselves or others with a mental disorder, it permits the patient to be held for a maximum period of 72 hours. a. Patients admitted into the Accident & Emergency department detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have a Responsible Clinician allocated. Patients who are not under section have access to the Mental Health Liaison Team. b. Patients admitted onto a ward at the acute Trust detained under various sections of the Mental Health Act have an allocated Responsible Clinician. As section 5 (2) is a holding power only, there is no Responsible Clinician allocated for a vulnerable patient being held pending assessment for consideration for detention under the Mental health Act. c. During the waiting period of up to 72 hours, Mental Health Liaison will not attend the acute ward or make assessment of the presenting risks of self-harm. d. The acute care healthcare professionals do not have specialist mental health training to conduct a mental health assessment and the consequential presenting harm. e. There was confusion at the acute Trust as to what regime was required to ensure that a patient awaiting Mental Health Act assessment could be put under 1:1 observation. The Trust policy was confusing and did not cover patients like Aaron Deeley. f. There is no joint protocol to cover the working between the two Trusts on this issue as the referral for Mental Health Act assessment goes outside of both organisations. There is a lacuna for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment and requiring simultaneous physical healthcare when a significant risk has been identified such that a patient may require detention for their own safety. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure timely and appropriate Mental Health Act assessment; Inadequate mental health risk assessment.

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 a joint EPUT–MSE working protocol defining responsibilities for patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As set out in evidence by EPUT during the course of this Inquest; a patient is placed on a section 5(2) MHA by the Acute Trust, there is a requirement for the mental health liaison team at EPUT to be informed to ensure that appropriate mental health support is in place.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Update and ratify the Mental Health Liaison Service Operational Policy and SOP to address risk management and support for patients awaiting assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In support of the collaborative approach that both Trusts are taking forward, the service matron has confirmed MSE leads that EPUT will be supportive of an active role in the ratification of this policy. Further, the EPUT Mental Health Liaison Service Operational Policy has been updated to include the support and advice to acute providers regarding risk management of patient’s presenting as requiring assessment under the Mental Health Act 2007. A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was presented at the Liaison Services steering group on the 30th July 2024, final copy for comments has been circulated for comments by 5th August 2024; the Policy is now due for final ratification.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Share the reviewed Mental Health Liaison SOP with all Liaison Team staff to promote awareness and consistent practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In light of this Regulation 28 Report, a review of the Mental Health Liaison SOP has been undertaken. The SOP now provides a clearer direction for the Mental Health Liaison Team staff to support and assist patients and acute colleagues in the management of patients who are awaiting formal assessment under the Mental Health Act. With Mental Health Liaison Staff particularly supporting in the identification and management of risk. The recent review of this SOP is being shared with all MHLT staff in order to ensure awareness and consistency throughout the service.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 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

Continue delivering training to MSE on available support and Mental Health Liaison Team roles.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Further, whilst the project group takes forward the joint protocol, EPUT’s Mental Health Act office continues to deliver training to MSE which includes the support available and role of the Mental Health Liaison team.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Provide EPUT input and support to MSE’s ratification of its acute-hospital mental health admission and treatment policy.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In support of the collaborative approach that both Trusts are taking forward, the service matron has confirmed MSE leads that EPUT will be supportive of an active role in the ratification of this policy. Further, the EPUT Mental Health Liaison Service Operational Policy has been updated to include the support and advice to acute providers regarding risk management of patient’s presenting as requiring assessment under the Mental Health Act 2007. A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was presented at the Liaison Services steering group on the 30th July 2024, final copy for comments has been circulated for comments by 5th August 2024; the Policy is now due for final ratification.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Deliver nursing training on the updated supervision policy and record-keeping standards for supervision documentation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“A key management tool for staff caring for acute patients with mental health needs is our ‘MSEPO-21228 Policy for Enhanced Supervision and Engagement’. We have therefore made several improvements to this policy to provide more practical guidance and support for staff during this important time while patients await assessment. We have also delivered training to nursing colleagues in relation to the updated policy and refreshers on record keeping standards so that staff are appropriately skilled in how to complete the supervision paperwork correctly.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Review and update the acute hospital mental health admission policy with practical guidance on accessing and escalating to the Mental Health Liaison Team.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have recently reviewed our policy ‘MSEPO-21231 Admission & Treatment of Patients with a Mental Health Disorder in an Acute Hospital Setting’ which reinforces the mental health support available to patients whilst in ED and inpatient wards.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Rewrite enhanced-supervision criteria to clarify when patients awaiting assessment should receive enhanced supervision.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Section 5 of our Policy for Enhanced Supervision and Engagement has been re-written in collaboration with the Mental Health Lead Nurse to clearly set out the criteria that should be met for a patient to trigger for enhanced supervision.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 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

Develop a joint protocol with EPUT covering assessment sequencing, referral expectations, and staff roles and responsibilities.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The joint working group will meet for the first time on 23 September 2024, and senior colleagues will set out terms of reference including the sequencing of assessments for patients with both a mental and physical health need; a written service level agreement so that staff are clear on when to ask for support, and when to expect it; a document setting out clear roles and responsibilities for staff at both trusts.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Improve the enhanced supervision policy with practical guidance for safely supporting patients awaiting Mental Health Act assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“A key management tool for staff caring for acute patients with mental health needs is our ‘MSEPO-21228 Policy for Enhanced Supervision and Engagement’. We have therefore made several improvements to this policy to provide more practical guidance and support for staff during this important time while patients await assessment. We have also delivered training to nursing colleagues in relation to the updated policy and refreshers on record keeping standards so that staff are appropriately skilled in how to complete the supervision paperwork correctly.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Deliver ongoing mental health training for MSE staff covering enhanced supervision, engagement, de-escalation, risk assessment and risk management.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have also recently developed a rolling training programme with EPUT so that our staff can learn from the experts, and develop their skills and confidence delivering de-escalation techniques, therapeutic engagement, risk assessment, awareness of warning signs, triggers and environmental hazards and risk management.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 2024

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

The Acute Trust is responsible for responding to concerns about the regime and policy for one-to-one observation pending Mental Health Act assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“With respect to the Learned Coroner, the answer to this particular concern will be for the Acute Trust to respond to. However, by way of completeness, the planned updates to the Mental Health Liaison Service Operational Policy will include provisions around support and advice to Acute providers regarding care planning and risk management.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 2024

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

The Code of Practice does not require a Responsible Clinician for patients held under section 5(2), and the Trust complied with applicable provisions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Mental Health Act 1983 Code of Practice at paragraph 36.1 refers to the identification of Responsible Clinician for patients being assessed and treated under the Act (i.e. section 2 for assessment and treatment, section 3 for treatment). There is no mention of the need for the identification of a Responsible Clinician requirement for patients who are subject to a holding power under section 5 (2). It is therefore respectfully submitted that the Trust adhered to the above provisions when applying the requirements of the Mental Health Act 1983 to the care and treatment of Mr Deeley.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 2024

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

Comprehensive mental-health and associated risk assessments are provided by EPUT; acute-trust staff are expected to identify when assessments are needed.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As an acute trust we cannot expect all staff to be able to conduct comprehensive mental health assessments and associated risk assessments, this is a service that EPUT are contracted to provide. However, staff must be trained to identify when mental health assessments are required, and all staff should know when a patient is at risk of harm, to themselves or others.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 2024

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

Mental Health Liaison Team provision is commissioned by the ICB under contract with EPUT, requiring those bodies' involvement in service arrangements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have listened to this concern, and we feel this is a key topic for us to take forward with EPUT in our future working arrangements. As you will be aware, the MHLT service is commissioned by our local Integrated Care Board (ICB), and there exists a contractual arrangement between the ICB and Essex Partnership University Trust (EPUT).”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 2024

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.8

  1. 1

    Review the Mental Health Liaison training package to clarify Acute Trust and Liaison Team roles and responsibilities.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  2. 2

    Provide senior oversight of the MSE–EPUT Service Level Agreement and Mental Health Act assessment escalations.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  3. 3

    Add a Section 5(2) decision-making flowchart and associated pathway guidance to the acute hospital mental health admission policy.

    Stated by Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  4. 4

    Deliver staff training on applying the Section 5(2) flowchart and maintaining patient safety while awaiting formal assessment.

    Stated by Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  5. 5

    Establish escalation routes enabling senior staff to obtain external mental health support, including Registered Mental Health Nurses, when ward capacity or risk requires it.

    Stated by Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  6. 6

    Convene a joint working group with the ICB and EPUT to decide arrangements for coordinated mental health support in acute hospitals.

    Stated by Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  7. 7

    Employ a Mental Health Lead Nurse to strengthen mental health policies, processes and staff training with partner agencies.

    Stated by Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.
  8. 8

    Discuss received Regulation 28 reports through the national working group and share key learning across NHS national and regional services.

    Stated by NHS EnglandStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 June 2024.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    Mental Health Act detention cannot be applied in Accident and Emergency because patients are not formally admitted to inpatient wards.

    Stated by Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation TrustDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 Mental Health Liaison training package to clarify Acute Trust and Liaison Team roles and responsibilities.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Further, whilst the project group takes forward the joint protocol, EPUT’s Mental Health Act office continues to deliver training to MSE which includes the support available and role of the Mental Health Liaison team.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 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

Provide senior oversight of the MSE–EPUT Service Level Agreement and Mental Health Act assessment escalations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The SLA between MSE and EPUT, as well as the management and responsibility of the Mental Health Act assessments is being addressed at a senior level – with all escalations and concerns now having the benefit of senior oversight.”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 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

Add a Section 5(2) decision-making flowchart and associated pathway guidance to the acute hospital mental health admission policy.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We acknowledge that our pathway documentation for patients detained under Section 5(2) need reform. We have therefore added a new flowchart to our ‘Admission & Treatment of Patients with a Mental Health Disorder in an Acute Hospital Setting’ Policy. A copy of the flowchart is attached for reference.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Deliver staff training on applying the Section 5(2) flowchart and maintaining patient safety while awaiting formal assessment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Our new training sessions cover the practical application of this flowchart with worked examples for staff to understand the correct route to treatment for patients. We are confident that staff attending the training are clear on the steps they should take to maintain patient wellbeing and safety, whilst awaiting formal assessment.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Establish escalation routes enabling senior staff to obtain external mental health support, including Registered Mental Health Nurses, when ward capacity or risk requires it.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We now have clear escalation routes to senior colleagues who can access external support, for example Registered Mental Health Nurses, when the ward team are unable to meet the patient’s needs, or the risks mean that extra help is needed. I am aware these practices are happening, and we are appropriately managing and mitigating risks.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 5 · response
Published 26 June 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

Convene a joint working group with the ICB and EPUT to decide arrangements for coordinated mental health support in acute hospitals.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have taken the lead with organising a joint working group with the ICB, EPUT and ourselves to discuss this issue as well as the mental health services provided to us, as a whole, to make sure we are getting this service right for our patients.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 3 · response
Published 26 June 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

Employ a Mental Health Lead Nurse to strengthen mental health policies, processes and staff training with partner agencies.

Verbatim wording from the response

“We have therefore employed a Mental Health Lead Nurse tasked to review our current policies, processes, and training needs. They are already working closely with partner agencies to strengthen current practice and increase staff knowledge.”

Source location

Response from Mid and South Essex NHS
Page 4 · response
Published 26 June 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

Discuss received Regulation 28 reports through the national working group and share key learning across NHS national and regional services.

Verbatim wording from the response

“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 Aaron, 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.”

Source location

Response from NHS England
Page 2 · response
Published 26 June 2024

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

Mental Health Act detention cannot be applied in Accident and Emergency because patients are not formally admitted to inpatient wards.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In order for an application for detention under the Mental Health Act 1983 to be made the application needs to be addressed to the managers of the specific hospital where the person is being detained for purpose of admission. The application then needs to be formally accepted by the hospital managers (or nominated person on behalf of) for the named specific”

Source location

Response from Essex Partnership NHS
Page 1 · response
Published 26 June 2024

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
3/3

Data last updated 7 September 2026