Girmaye Guyo

PFD Report Partially Responded Ref: 2023-0195
Date of Report 16 June 2023
Coroner Zak Golombeck
Coroner Area Manchester City
Response Deadline est. 11 August 2023
1 of 2 responded · Over 2 years old
Response Status
Responses 1 of 2
56-Day Deadline 11 Aug 2023
Over 2 years old — no identified published response
About PFD responses

Organisations named in PFD reports must respond within 56 days explaining what actions they are taking.

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Coroner's Concerns
The MATTER OF CONCERN is as follows: The Nearest Relative Power may (as it did in this case) present an opportunity for a patient and/or their Nearest Relative to apply to the Responsible Clinician for discharge in circumstances when the patient remains liable for their continued detention There does not appear to be a thorough procedure or legal test for clinicians to apply, and thus there is a risk that Responsible Clinicians may be faced with circumstances whereby a patient will be discharged from hospital despite them continuing to meet the criteria for detention.
Responses
Department of Health and Social Care
9 May 2024
The Department of Health and Social Care clarifies that Responsible Clinicians already have powers under section 25 of the Mental Health Act to bar discharge requests from a Nearest Relative through a 'barring report'. The Government states it does not intend to amend these powers, as they are considered an important safeguard for patients and families. AI summary
View full response
Dear Mr Golombeck,

Thank you for your Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths dated 16 June 2023 about the death of Girmaye Guyo Liban. I am replying as Minister with responsibility for Mental Health.

Firstly, I would like to say how saddened I was to read of the circumstances of Mr Liban and I offer my sincere condolences to their family and loved ones. The circumstances your report describes are concerning and I am grateful to you for bringing these matters to my attention.

Please accept my sincere apologies for the significant delay in responding to this matter.

The report raises concerns over the use of provisions in the Mental Health Act 1983 for a person’s Nearest Relative to exercise their power to seek the discharge of a patient. In this case you believe that this discharge was not in accordance with the patient’s continuing need for clinical care.

In responding to the matter you have raised, I should say firstly that section 25 of the Mental Health Act does give the patient’s Responsible Clinician powers to bar such requests for discharge.

As set out in the Act’s Code of Practice (32.21-22), before giving a discharge order, the Nearest Relative must give the hospital managers at least 72 hours’ notice in writing of their intention to discharge the patient. During that period, the patient’s responsible clinician can block the discharge by issuing a ‘barring report’ stating that, if discharged, the patient is likely to act in a manner dangerous to themselves or others. If a Nearest Relative’s discharge is barred they are not able to apply again for six months.

The Government does not intent to amend the Nearest Relative powers of discharge as, although they are rarely used, they do provide an important safeguard for patients and their families. Nevertheless, the tragic case you have raised with me, indicate that patient safety is paramount, and I regret that for Mr Liban the outcome was so tragic.

I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention.
Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
I concluded the inquest into the death of Girmaye Guyo Liban on 17th May 2023 and recorded that he died from: 1a Drowning I returned an Open conclusion following investigations.
Circumstances of the Death
The Deceased had a long history of mental health illness and substance abuse. Between 4th June 2020 and 15th September 2020 he was detained pursuant to the provisions of Mental Health Act 1983 at Eagleton Ward, Meadowbrook Unit. The Deceased's discharge from Eagleton Ward was authorised via his mother using her Nearest Relative Powers pursuant to the provisions of Mental Health Act 1983, and its associated Code of Practice. The Deceased then returned to the family home. The evidence that I heard at the Inquest was such that the Deceased was still liable to be held under Section 3 Mental Health Act 1983; however, due to the difference in the test being applied for consideration of an application by a Nearest Relative, there was no choice but to discharge the Deceased Further evidence alluded to the concerns from clinicians about this power, and although the evidence was that it is seldomly used, it presents an opportunity for patients and families to deviate from the clinical course prescribed by clinicians. There was no consideration for a Community Treatment Order for the Deceased as the provisions of the legislation refer to discharge from detention. The Deceased remained unwell in the community, and on 10th November 2020 he went missing. His body was found in a local reservoir on 26th November 2020. There was insufficient evidence to determine how he came to enter the water.
Copies Sent To
. organisations who may find 1t useful or of interest
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

Data sourced from Courts and Tribunals Judiciary under the Open Government Licence.