After failure at the High Court last week, my family's lawyers are today lodging an application at the Court of Appeal. Though we were disappointed with last week's ruling, our legal team have worked hard over the last few days to build a strong case for an appeal.
A key point of the appeal is that my mother's death should automatically get the same form of investigation as a person who was in prison at the time of death. The judge at the High Court did not consider this point and, although the law is not clear in this area, we have a strong argument that this should be the case. We are also strongly arguing that the state was directly involved in my mother's death and therefore should have to answer for its actions under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Of course, we wouldn't be able to continue this case without having public funding and, in a further lift for our family last week, legal aid was granted on Friday within a few hours to allow us to make the appeal. Our advocate's advice is that the case is strong and the public interest is significant. As my family prepare to mark the second anniversary of my mother's death on 2nd October, we will continue to argue that people who die in mental health detention are just as important as anyone else.
Monday 29 September 2008
Wednesday 24 September 2008
Case proceeds to the Court of Appeal
After a complex hearing at the High Court yesterday, Mr. Justice Blake decided not to grant my family permission for a Judicial Review to be heard about the ineffectiveness of the inquest into my mother's death.
Giving judgement, Mr. Justice Blake said that he felt there was not the need for a fresh inquiry despite recognising there had been numerous questions over the evidence relied upon by Dr. Andrew Reid, the coroner in the case. In an unfortunate judgement, Mr. Justice Blake did not accept that the state had a duty to protect my mother to the same extent as that owed to prisoners. He also stated that human rights requirements for a broad investigation in cases such as my mother's did not apply, but recognised that the law in this area was not settled. This will be a key aspect of the appeal.
Our legal team is now working rapidly over the next couple of days to assess the merits of an application to the Court of Appeal. We think it is shocking that the deaths of people as vulnerable as my mother - and in such appalling circumstances - do not attract the same safeguards as granted to prisoners and intend to continue arguing the point.
We are not convinced that the failures which occurred in my mother's care will be prevented in the future and believe that other vulnerable mental health patients are still at risk. The inability of the London Ambulance Service to gain access to a locked ward, the lack of training of nurses in operating key life-saving equipment and the failure to place my mother on a ward more capable of caring for her complex needs are systemic failings which, we believe, must be publicly scrutinised in detail. Anything less than this suggests what some of us already suspect - people who suffer from mental health difficulties are still the subject of widespread discrimination. Has anything really changed since the Victorian asylums closed?
The mental health trust, to date, have relied on a cynical argument about time limits to have the case thrown out. This argument was not successful yesterday. We call on the trust to drop any further opposition and focus on the needs of society's most vulnerable individuals. We will not rest until they do.
Giving judgement, Mr. Justice Blake said that he felt there was not the need for a fresh inquiry despite recognising there had been numerous questions over the evidence relied upon by Dr. Andrew Reid, the coroner in the case. In an unfortunate judgement, Mr. Justice Blake did not accept that the state had a duty to protect my mother to the same extent as that owed to prisoners. He also stated that human rights requirements for a broad investigation in cases such as my mother's did not apply, but recognised that the law in this area was not settled. This will be a key aspect of the appeal.
Our legal team is now working rapidly over the next couple of days to assess the merits of an application to the Court of Appeal. We think it is shocking that the deaths of people as vulnerable as my mother - and in such appalling circumstances - do not attract the same safeguards as granted to prisoners and intend to continue arguing the point.
We are not convinced that the failures which occurred in my mother's care will be prevented in the future and believe that other vulnerable mental health patients are still at risk. The inability of the London Ambulance Service to gain access to a locked ward, the lack of training of nurses in operating key life-saving equipment and the failure to place my mother on a ward more capable of caring for her complex needs are systemic failings which, we believe, must be publicly scrutinised in detail. Anything less than this suggests what some of us already suspect - people who suffer from mental health difficulties are still the subject of widespread discrimination. Has anything really changed since the Victorian asylums closed?
The mental health trust, to date, have relied on a cynical argument about time limits to have the case thrown out. This argument was not successful yesterday. We call on the trust to drop any further opposition and focus on the needs of society's most vulnerable individuals. We will not rest until they do.
Wednesday 3 September 2008
The judiciary fails my mother again
Well it's been a few months since I last provided an update about my mum's case on here, primarily because it has taken months to have a decision about permission for the case to proceed at the High Court.
Unfortunately in early July Mr Justice Underhill refused permission on the papers, arguing that my family has taken too long to lodge papers. There was a substantial delay at the beginning of the year because the mental health trust had failed on numerous occasions to disclose important documentation about my mother's care, including health notes around the time of her death.
My family and I believe that Mr. Justice Underhill has unfairly rewarded the mental health trust for their delay in a judgement that was confusing and where he seemed to rule on the substantive merits of the case without probing the evidence. In light of this our solicitors immediately renewed the application for permission at an oral hearing, as is our right, where we will be arguing that the public interest is so significant that time limits should be set aside. The hearing date has been set for 23rd September.
Whilst vulnerable people continue to die in mental health institutions in this country, we believe it is not enough merely to brush aside concerns about the way in which the system operates. We will continue to fight for justice for my mother and, once again, thank all those who continue to provide support by way of letters and emails.
Take good care,
Steven Allen
Unfortunately in early July Mr Justice Underhill refused permission on the papers, arguing that my family has taken too long to lodge papers. There was a substantial delay at the beginning of the year because the mental health trust had failed on numerous occasions to disclose important documentation about my mother's care, including health notes around the time of her death.
My family and I believe that Mr. Justice Underhill has unfairly rewarded the mental health trust for their delay in a judgement that was confusing and where he seemed to rule on the substantive merits of the case without probing the evidence. In light of this our solicitors immediately renewed the application for permission at an oral hearing, as is our right, where we will be arguing that the public interest is so significant that time limits should be set aside. The hearing date has been set for 23rd September.
Whilst vulnerable people continue to die in mental health institutions in this country, we believe it is not enough merely to brush aside concerns about the way in which the system operates. We will continue to fight for justice for my mother and, once again, thank all those who continue to provide support by way of letters and emails.
Take good care,
Steven Allen
Monday 28 January 2008
Independent on Sunday article
The Independent on Sunday yesterday featured my mum's case in an effort to show the appalling legal loophole that has allowed the inquests of detained mental health patients not to be effectively scrutinised, again showing that "mental health patients have even less rights than criminals."
Here is the article in full.
Mental Health Campaign: Families demand full inquests for deaths in secure hospitals
By Nina Lakhani
Sunday, 27 January 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/.../deaths-in-secure-hospitals-774652.html
Hundreds of people with mental health problems are dying while detained in hospital but their deaths are not being fully investigated.
Legal experts and campaigners claim coroners are failing to investigate thoroughly many of these deaths because of a legal loophole, with the result that suspected failures in care and even abuse are going undetected.
Coroners have complete freedom to determine the extent to which the death of a mental health patient will be investigated, unlike deaths in prison or police custody where they are legally compelled to investigate fully in the presence of a jury.
In many cases they are refusing to hold jury inquests – widely seen as a broader and more exacting form of inquiry.
Figures obtained by The Independent on Sunday show that 340 people died in psychiatric hospitals while under section last year – nearly one a day – although the Mental Health Care Commission believes some deaths in psychiatric care are not being reported.
As a result, grieving families are left to battle an "archaic system", often for years, just to find out how their relatives died.
Critics claim it is evidence of the discrimination suffered by mentally ill people and are demanding urgent changes to the law. "We are talking about the ultimate injustice; people go into hospital for a mental illness and are coming out dead. We need to send out a clear message that whatever happened to the individual behind closed doors is worthy of a thorough investigation," says Paul Farmer, chief executive ofthe mental health charity Mind
Coroners failing to investigate the deaths of psychiatric patients to the satisfaction of the families now face a High Court legal challenge.
Sandra Allen, a pianist and manic depressive, died of a heart attack in a north London psychiatric hospital in 2006.
A coroner ruled she died of natural causes which were unavoidable, but her children are challenging the coroner's verdict because they believe their mother's death could have been avoided with better care.
Mrs Allen, 61, died from a heart attack after choking on a sandwich she had been left to eat unattended: she had no dentures and a long history of choking. Staff failed to clear her airways and were unable to operate an oxygen canister. She was still choking when the ambulance arrived. It had waited for several minutes outside the unit because the security guard was asleep.
Her family argue the coroner was wrong to reject their request for a broader inquiry as much of the psychiatric and physical care she received while under section was unacceptable and they believe it contributed to her untimely death.
Devastated by the coroner's refusal to hear evidence from expert witnesses, they say they will fight "as long as it takes".
Solicitor Emma Norton, who acts for the family, said: "This case highlights the difficulties often faced by families in ensuring there are thorough inquiries into the deaths of patients in psychiatric institutions.
"Unlike prisoners, the families of dead patients are not automatically entitled to an inquest with a jury. It can be an uphill battle to get the coroner to consider the wider issues relevant to the death. There is a lot of inconsistency in these decisions and it depends on the coroner."
Critics argue patients who have been locked up and compelled to take treatment they did not want deserve an equal standard of justice when they die.
"This situation is indicative of how few rights mental health patients have. They have done nothing wrong; their only crime is to suffer from an illness, yet they have fewer rights than criminals," says Jane Harris, from the mental health charity Rethink.
"How many more people have to die without proper investigations? We are talking about hundreds of deaths."
Campaigners hoped the Government's proposed Coroners Bill might remedy some of the failings, but it was not mentioned in the Queen's Speech.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said: "The Bill proposes that a coroner will investigate a death if they suspect the deceased died while detained, irrespective of the nature of the death or the type of detention."
But the co-director of Inquest, Helen Shaw, said: "We cannot take it for granted the Coroners Bill will happen just because the Government says it will. We need to crank up the heat and campaigning so detained patients are treated in the same way as any person detained by the state."
Andrew Lansley, shadow Secretary of State for Health, said: "There is a pressing need for this Bill. The Government promised one and they have had plenty of time to do so, but they have dithered and delayed."
'Whenever we visited her on the ward she would be covered in bruises'
Steven Allen, 23, a trainee lawyer, is the second of Sandra Allen's five children. Here he describes the family's determination to get justice for their mother.
"My mum died in hospital while held under section 3 of the Mental Health Act. She was 61 years old. Her life was a long battle with the mental health system and now she's dead we have to keep battling for her.
"She'd been in and out of hospitals since her 20s but as her physical health got worse we fought hard to get her looked after properly; we never won the fight. Whenever we visited her on the ward she would be covered in bruises and we would leave feeling terrified for her.
"We desperately wanted her moved to the elderly ward but were told she was too young and they wanted to 'keep muddling through'. I'm sure the staff on the elderly ward would have been better qualified to manage the heart attack.
"We believe she died needlessly. Why hadn't her heart disease been picked up? Why couldn't the staff work a simple oxygen canister? These are the questions we wanted the coroner to answer but he let us down badly; he dismissed my mum's life as unimportant.
"We know this could take years but we want her struggles acknowledged and justice, not just for her, but for every other family in this situation."
Here is the article in full.
Mental Health Campaign: Families demand full inquests for deaths in secure hospitals
By Nina Lakhani
Sunday, 27 January 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/.../deaths-in-secure-hospitals-774652.html
Hundreds of people with mental health problems are dying while detained in hospital but their deaths are not being fully investigated.
Legal experts and campaigners claim coroners are failing to investigate thoroughly many of these deaths because of a legal loophole, with the result that suspected failures in care and even abuse are going undetected.
Coroners have complete freedom to determine the extent to which the death of a mental health patient will be investigated, unlike deaths in prison or police custody where they are legally compelled to investigate fully in the presence of a jury.
In many cases they are refusing to hold jury inquests – widely seen as a broader and more exacting form of inquiry.
Figures obtained by The Independent on Sunday show that 340 people died in psychiatric hospitals while under section last year – nearly one a day – although the Mental Health Care Commission believes some deaths in psychiatric care are not being reported.
As a result, grieving families are left to battle an "archaic system", often for years, just to find out how their relatives died.
Critics claim it is evidence of the discrimination suffered by mentally ill people and are demanding urgent changes to the law. "We are talking about the ultimate injustice; people go into hospital for a mental illness and are coming out dead. We need to send out a clear message that whatever happened to the individual behind closed doors is worthy of a thorough investigation," says Paul Farmer, chief executive ofthe mental health charity Mind
Coroners failing to investigate the deaths of psychiatric patients to the satisfaction of the families now face a High Court legal challenge.
Sandra Allen, a pianist and manic depressive, died of a heart attack in a north London psychiatric hospital in 2006.
A coroner ruled she died of natural causes which were unavoidable, but her children are challenging the coroner's verdict because they believe their mother's death could have been avoided with better care.
Mrs Allen, 61, died from a heart attack after choking on a sandwich she had been left to eat unattended: she had no dentures and a long history of choking. Staff failed to clear her airways and were unable to operate an oxygen canister. She was still choking when the ambulance arrived. It had waited for several minutes outside the unit because the security guard was asleep.
Her family argue the coroner was wrong to reject their request for a broader inquiry as much of the psychiatric and physical care she received while under section was unacceptable and they believe it contributed to her untimely death.
Devastated by the coroner's refusal to hear evidence from expert witnesses, they say they will fight "as long as it takes".
Solicitor Emma Norton, who acts for the family, said: "This case highlights the difficulties often faced by families in ensuring there are thorough inquiries into the deaths of patients in psychiatric institutions.
"Unlike prisoners, the families of dead patients are not automatically entitled to an inquest with a jury. It can be an uphill battle to get the coroner to consider the wider issues relevant to the death. There is a lot of inconsistency in these decisions and it depends on the coroner."
Critics argue patients who have been locked up and compelled to take treatment they did not want deserve an equal standard of justice when they die.
"This situation is indicative of how few rights mental health patients have. They have done nothing wrong; their only crime is to suffer from an illness, yet they have fewer rights than criminals," says Jane Harris, from the mental health charity Rethink.
"How many more people have to die without proper investigations? We are talking about hundreds of deaths."
Campaigners hoped the Government's proposed Coroners Bill might remedy some of the failings, but it was not mentioned in the Queen's Speech.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said: "The Bill proposes that a coroner will investigate a death if they suspect the deceased died while detained, irrespective of the nature of the death or the type of detention."
But the co-director of Inquest, Helen Shaw, said: "We cannot take it for granted the Coroners Bill will happen just because the Government says it will. We need to crank up the heat and campaigning so detained patients are treated in the same way as any person detained by the state."
Andrew Lansley, shadow Secretary of State for Health, said: "There is a pressing need for this Bill. The Government promised one and they have had plenty of time to do so, but they have dithered and delayed."
'Whenever we visited her on the ward she would be covered in bruises'
Steven Allen, 23, a trainee lawyer, is the second of Sandra Allen's five children. Here he describes the family's determination to get justice for their mother.
"My mum died in hospital while held under section 3 of the Mental Health Act. She was 61 years old. Her life was a long battle with the mental health system and now she's dead we have to keep battling for her.
"She'd been in and out of hospitals since her 20s but as her physical health got worse we fought hard to get her looked after properly; we never won the fight. Whenever we visited her on the ward she would be covered in bruises and we would leave feeling terrified for her.
"We desperately wanted her moved to the elderly ward but were told she was too young and they wanted to 'keep muddling through'. I'm sure the staff on the elderly ward would have been better qualified to manage the heart attack.
"We believe she died needlessly. Why hadn't her heart disease been picked up? Why couldn't the staff work a simple oxygen canister? These are the questions we wanted the coroner to answer but he let us down badly; he dismissed my mum's life as unimportant.
"We know this could take years but we want her struggles acknowledged and justice, not just for her, but for every other family in this situation."
Monday 21 January 2008
Happy New Year, and the Campaign Broadens
Dear All,
Although it's now already over three weeks into the new year, please accept my greetings to you all for a prosperous time in the rest of 2008.
Things are starting to happen in respect of the campaign about proper investigations into the deaths of those detained under the Mental Health Act. Firstly, I'm drawing up a campaign statement to ask that the law is changed to ensure inquests by juries in such cases, which will then be open to the signature of NGOs, individuals and public figures. This I hope to be able to share with you all next week, with more detailed plans about the campaign.
In addition, the Independent on Sunday will be running an article this weekend featuring my mum's case and analysing the broader legal situation which I've written about on this site at some length. Hopefully this will provide a springboard for a broader public debate on the adequacy of these death investigations and we will be able to redouble our pressure for change to occur within the coronial system. Please get a copy if you can.
I also just wanted to remind everyone that the petition calling for a change in the law - at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Coroners/ - is due to close for signatures at the end of this month. All we're asking for is that the deaths of detained patients are treated as seriously as those that occur in prisons and police stations - the logic is almost painful in its moral clarity. We really need more signatures to get a good response from the government so please consider clicking the link above if you have not already done so.
In a deeply disturbing case where Geoffrey Hodgkin died in 2004 whilst under Section after being restrained, a public inquiry report at the end of last year uncovered similar institutional calamities as occurred around my mum's death. Failures included the inability of staff to use resuscitation equipment, extremely poor management, training and oversight of staff, and the complete unwillingness of the mental health trust to engage with subsequent investigations. Geoffrey's death, like my mother's, highlight again the inadequacy of the the government's protection of our most vulnerable citizens, which my family and I believe cannot be allowed to continue. More details about Geoffrey Hodgkin's case can be found in the inquiry report at http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/media/hosp20061101r7.pdf.
We hope that, like Geoffrey's family, by standing up to the overwhelming disinterest in matters of life and death in our mental health institutions, we can push for severely overdue reforms to a system that regularly breaches the most fundamental of human rights. It is truly saddening that, in 2008, we are still having to make such basic demands for human dignity, and even more saddening that most people are completely unaware of the situation. We will continue shouting until our point is acted upon.
With best wishes to you all,
Steven Allen
Although it's now already over three weeks into the new year, please accept my greetings to you all for a prosperous time in the rest of 2008.
Things are starting to happen in respect of the campaign about proper investigations into the deaths of those detained under the Mental Health Act. Firstly, I'm drawing up a campaign statement to ask that the law is changed to ensure inquests by juries in such cases, which will then be open to the signature of NGOs, individuals and public figures. This I hope to be able to share with you all next week, with more detailed plans about the campaign.
In addition, the Independent on Sunday will be running an article this weekend featuring my mum's case and analysing the broader legal situation which I've written about on this site at some length. Hopefully this will provide a springboard for a broader public debate on the adequacy of these death investigations and we will be able to redouble our pressure for change to occur within the coronial system. Please get a copy if you can.
I also just wanted to remind everyone that the petition calling for a change in the law - at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Coroners/ - is due to close for signatures at the end of this month. All we're asking for is that the deaths of detained patients are treated as seriously as those that occur in prisons and police stations - the logic is almost painful in its moral clarity. We really need more signatures to get a good response from the government so please consider clicking the link above if you have not already done so.
In a deeply disturbing case where Geoffrey Hodgkin died in 2004 whilst under Section after being restrained, a public inquiry report at the end of last year uncovered similar institutional calamities as occurred around my mum's death. Failures included the inability of staff to use resuscitation equipment, extremely poor management, training and oversight of staff, and the complete unwillingness of the mental health trust to engage with subsequent investigations. Geoffrey's death, like my mother's, highlight again the inadequacy of the the government's protection of our most vulnerable citizens, which my family and I believe cannot be allowed to continue. More details about Geoffrey Hodgkin's case can be found in the inquiry report at http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/media/hosp20061101r7.pdf.
We hope that, like Geoffrey's family, by standing up to the overwhelming disinterest in matters of life and death in our mental health institutions, we can push for severely overdue reforms to a system that regularly breaches the most fundamental of human rights. It is truly saddening that, in 2008, we are still having to make such basic demands for human dignity, and even more saddening that most people are completely unaware of the situation. We will continue shouting until our point is acted upon.
With best wishes to you all,
Steven Allen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
