Susan Adams

PFD Report All Responded Ref: 2021-0116
Date of Report 21 April 2021
Coroner Andrew Haigh
Response Deadline est. 16 June 2021
All 1 response received · Deadline: 16 Jun 2021
Coroner's Concerns (AI summary)
Patients living near county boundaries face difficulties accessing consistent secondary psychiatric care, as crisis and long-term treatment services are split across different jurisdictions.
View full coroner's concerns
During the course %f the inquest the evidence revealed a matter concern: In my opinion there is a risk that future giving rise to taken. In the circumstances it is deaths will occur unless action is my statutory duty to report to you. TbetMATTER OF CONCERN is as follows: Mrs Adams and her Dosthill; Tamworth; Staffordshire: was told that this family lived in from the border with Warwickshire was approximately 50 feet her GP Practice was in (and not far from West Midlands as well) and that aer Ganceacto econdangsbentai eeaiickseivc She needed regular psychiatric significant mental health services and was advised there were Practice eing in idstiereng _ difficulties with this because of the home addrere andGP Staffordshire different counties. Mrs Adams could access the crisis team in buthong term treatment was supposedly to be providedsn Warwickshire Thismayhave impactedon_the care that Mrs Adams [eceived_ and being could be relevant for others who live close to county boundaries. wonder if anything can be done to facilitate arrangements for secondary psychiatric care in these circumstances. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and believe you have the power to take such action. YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond to this report within 58 days of the date of this report; namely by 10th June 2021. I, the coroner; may extend the period. Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action: Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed.
Responses
St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust NHS / Health Body
1 Jun 2021
Noted
MPFT acknowledges the concerns about commissioning difficulties for patients living near county boundaries, explains how they have worked with other trusts to provide care, and states that the matter has been forwarded to commissioners for consideration. (AI summary)
View full response
Dear Mr Haigh, RE: Susan Janet ADAMS Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths Thank you for your letter dated 21 st April March 2021, reporting a matter to us, in accordance with Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. May I take this opportunity to reassure you that following Mrs Adams death, we undertook a thorough investigation into the care delivered by the Midlands Partnership Foundation Trust. MATTER OF CONCERN: Mrs Adams and her family lived in Dosthi/1, Tamworth, Staffordshire. I was told that this was approximately 50 feet from the border with Warwickshire (and not far from West Midlands as well) and that her GP Practice was in Kingsbury Warwickshire. She needed regular psychiatric assistances from secondary mental health services and I was advised there were significant commissioning difficulties with this because of the home address and GP Practice being in different counties. Mrs Adams could access the crisis team in Staffordshire but long term treatment was supposedly to be provided in Warwickshire. This may have impacted on the care that Mrs Adams received and could be relevant for others who

r~t:bj Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust A Keele University Teaching Trust live close to county boundaries. I wonder if anything can be done to facilitate arrangements for secondary psychiatric care in these circumstances. Following discussions within the mental health seNices in the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Care Group and with corporate seNices, I am now in a position to respond to the specific concern raised during the course of the inquest. In 2020, the period covered in the serious incident investigation report, Mrs Adams had contact with a number of mental health providers during periods of crisis, according to the geography you describe in the matter of concern. Mrs Adams lived in Dosthill, Tamworth, and it would not be uncommon for individuals in Tamworth to touch on services delivered by the three NHS providers described here:
• Midlands Partnership Foundation Trust (MPFT): Mrs Adams' husband contacted the Access pathway in MPFT - pathway staff would offer advice, and forward any calls to the MPFT crisis resolution team when Mrs Adams was in crisis; these assessments would always be offered when required. They would also offer details for Coventry and Warwickshire services as Mrs Adams' commissioned provider, should she require future interventions.
• Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundation trust (BSMHFT): Mrs Adams frequently attended Good Hope Hospital where she was seen by the mental health liaison team, a seNice delivered by BSMHFT. The BSMHFT liaison team communicated with the Access team at MPFT and identified no mental health needs that necessitated care from secondary seNices.
• Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust (CWPT): As Mrs Adams' GP commissioned services from CWPT, advice would be for their services to be accessed where needed. However, when she was in a period of crisis the assessment would be undertaken by the team who were geographically closer to where she was. For example, on 19th July 2020 CWPT crisis team communicated with MPFT, MPFT provided the response to Mrs Adams with no delay. Throughout this period Mrs Adams' difficulties were deemed to be related to alcohol misuse with no acute mental health problems that would require secondary mental health services. In earlier years when Mrs Adams did require a secondary mental health services (1999 ­ 2005, 2014-2015, 2018, 2019) this was offered by MPFT (or the predecessor organisation South Staffordshire and Shropshire Foundation Trust). Throughout all of Mrs Adams' episodes of care, including that in 2020, MPFT has worked well with partners to ensure people living on the county border are not disadvantaged in terms of seNices offered and in delivering patient-centred collaborative working between organisations. However, given your concerns, we believe the matter is one for commissioners to consider and have therefore forwarded this case to them for their consideration and are happy to support the outcome of those conversations, as appropriate.

r~L:kj Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust A Keele University Teaching Trust I hope this response helps to address your concerns. However, if you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sent To
  • St George’s Hospital
Response Status
Linked responses 1 of 1
56-Day Deadline 16 Jun 2021
All responses received
About PFD responses

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

Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Report Sections
Investigation and Inquest
On 30h of December 2020 / commenced an Janet ADAMS: The investigation investigation into the death of Susan 2021. The concluded at the end of the inquest on 20th April borelusioriof the inquest was 'alcohol related' with the cause of death beagt tCaosined toxicity of ethanol, pregabalin and fentanyi withehepatic cirrhosis steatosis_ CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH In 4989 while working as a Police Officer Susan Adams was she never fully recovered from this She suffered severely assaulted and with her mental health and excess pain and developed a problem she was unable to live in her alcohol consumption: On 4th November 2020 in Sutton Coldfield where home in Tamworth and she was found dead in a hotel she was temporarily staying: Death resulted from the consequences of drinking too much alcohol
Related Inquiry Recommendations

Public inquiry recommendations addressing similar themes

GMMH local structured risk assessment responsibility
Southport Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
GMMH and Alder Hey joint SMART audit
Southport Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Thalassaemia Society Support
Infected Blood Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Cross-Administration Patient Safety Coordination
Infected Blood Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Haemophilia Centre Resources
Infected Blood Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Central Delivery with Devolved Support
Infected Blood Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Reduce Organisational Silos
RHI Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Multi-Trust Mortality Meeting Engagement
Hyponatraemia Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Commissioner for Survivors of Institutional Childhood Abuse (COSICA)
HIA Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration
Specialist Care and Assistance Facilities
HIA Inquiry
Poor health and social care integration

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