Health Service Commissioner : first report for session 1982/83 : selected investigations completed April- September 1982.

  • Great Britain. Health Service Commissioner.
Date:
1983
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Health Service Commissioner : first report for session 1982/83 : selected investigations completed April- September 1982. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    60/192 (page 58)
    on 27 December when it was decided to obtain a social report ; this was not mentioned to her on her return and as far as she knew a report was not prepared. 23. The SHO told my officer that the complainant did not discuss with her the timing of his brother’s discharge and the nurse to whom the complainant also spoke on 13 January could not recall any mention of it. Findings 24. Whether or not the complainant asked for his brother to be discharged late in the afternoon or whether he assumed that the arrangement which pertained when he went home for Christmas leave would do so again I do not know. But from the evidence I am satisfied that the decisions to dis- charge his brother, and that no special arrangements were required, were taken in the full knowledge of the home circumstances. I do not therefore uphold this complaint. (d) The complaint about the AHA’s response to the complaints 25. The solicitor wrote to the CHC on 10 April 1980 that his client was concerned that the consultant had told the coroner that he was not aware of the previous suicide attempt in 1977 and asked whether the reports of suicide threats made by the cousins and the complainant had been reported at the next ward round meeting. He enclosed a copy of the witness state- ment which his client had provided for the coroner. The CHC for- warded the correspondence to the health district. The district administra- tor (the DA) replied on 6 June reporting the consultant’s view that, as the coroner had been in possession of all the facts at the inquest and when recording an open verdict had made no comment on the treatment provided for the complainant’s brother at the hospital, he did not consider that he could respond in any further detail to the complaints made. The DA said that in the circumstances it would be difficult for the AHA to carry out any further investigation of the case. The complainant was not satisfied with this reply and his solicitor wrote to the CHC on 1 July expressing his dis- satisfaction. The CHC in a letter dated 16 October told the solicitor that the DA had suggested that the complainant should meet the consultant to discuss his complaints. The solicitor replied on 24 October that the complainant was willing to meet the consultant but not until a detailed written reply to the complaints had been received. Nothing further was heard from the health district and on 9 December 1980 the complainant’s Member of Parlia- ment (the Member) wrote to the DA expressing the opinion that it was not unreasonable of the complainant to ask for ‘at least preliminary replies’ before meeting the consultant. The DA told the Member on 21 January 1981 ‘I really feel that this matter can only be progressed by reiterating the offer that [the consultant] has already made... to talk to [the complainant] and/or his solicitor at a venue of their choice’. The complainant’s solicitor then wrote to me.