Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

5. Mrs E complains the Trust did not properly check her past medical history when it decided what medication to prescribe to manage her Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (people with ADHD can seem restless, may have trouble concentrating and may act on impulse).

6. Mrs E says she feels broken and mocked. She says her experience had a big effect on her and the Trust made her feel like a drug pusher. She says it has knocked her confidence and she felt doubted.

7. Mrs E wants the Trust to add notes to her record to say she disagrees with the outcome of her appointment in May 2022 and to tell her GP that her past diagnosis of emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD) has been removed.

8. In early 2022 Mrs E’s GP referred her to the Trust as she was concerned she had ADHD.

9. Mrs E attended an ADHD assessment at the Trust on 9 May. The Trust diagnosed her with ADHD and prescribed atomoxetine, a non-stimulant medication used to manage symptoms of ADHD.

10. Mrs E phoned the Trust on 13 May as she was concerned about side effects of the medication. She asked for an alternative because she has chronic fatigue syndrome and was worried the side effect of drowsiness would impact her.

11. On 23 May the Trust returned Mrs E’s call and discussed her concerns. The Trust put an alert on its system on 6 September to say Mrs E was unhappy with the outcome of her May appointment.

12. Mrs E discussed her ADHD medication with the Trust on 9 September. She explained she could not take atomoxetine due to social and religious reasons. It decided to prescribe methylphenidate, which is a central nervous stimulant used to manage symptoms of ADHD.

13. The Trust wrote to her GP on 13 March 2023 to explain it had reviewed Mrs E and her past diagnosis of EUPD should be removed from her record as it did not believe she has ever shown symptoms of this condition.

14. It also wrote to her GP on 28 September 2023 to explain Mrs E was not happy with how some of the information from her past had been taken out of context and gave it a more detailed report of her current mental health.

17. Before we decide if we should do a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. If we see evidence of something going wrong, we look at whether this had a negative effect that the organisation has not put right.

18. GMC guidance says, ‘you must adequately assess the patient’s conditions, taking account of their history (including the symptoms and psychological, spiritual, social and cultural factors), their views and values.’

19. Mrs E’s medical records show the Trust did an ADHD assessment on 9 May. It diagnosed her with ADHD and prescribed atomoxetine. We can see Mrs E was concerned about the side effects of the medication and called the Trust on 13 May.

20. The Trust returned her call on the same day and explained it had prescribed a non-stimulant medication due to her past medical history and what she told it during the assessment. It did not offer an alternative medication and suggested she explore seeing an ADHD coach or joining a peer group.

21. Based on the information available, it seems the Trust followed guidance and considered Mrs E’s history, views and values when it made the decision to prescribe atomoxetine. This is because it considered Mrs E’s past medical history and based its decision on what she told the Trust.

22. We understand Mrs E feels the Trust misunderstood what she told it and what her past medical history meant.

23. From the records we have seen and without having been there at the time, we cannot say whether the Trust misunderstood what she told it. But, we can see the it acknowledged that her experience was not positive and it apologised for this. It also acknowledged and apologised for the distress and upset Mrs E experienced.

24. Mrs E asked the Trust to put a note on her record to say she disagreed with the outcome of the discussion on 9 May and the details sent to her GP on 23 May. She also wanted the Trust to write a letter to her GP to explain that it had removed her diagnosis of EUPD.

25. We can see that the Trust added an alert to its system. It has also reviewed her again, prescribed an alternative medication and wrote to her GP to explain her diagnosis of EUPD had been removed. Mrs E told us she is doing very well on her new medication and we are pleased to hear this.

26. Our Principles say that to put things right organisations should provide an apology, explanation, an acknowledgement of responsibility and try to offer a solution that returns the complainant to the position they would have been in.

27. We are satisfied that the Trust’s actions are in line with our Principles. The Trust has done enough to put Mrs E back in the position she was in before the appointment in May 2022 and it has addressed what happened and its impact. It also seems to have already given Mrs E the outcomes she told us she wants. We will take no further action on this complaint.

28. We understand Mrs E’s experience has caused her great distress and we are sorry to hear this. We hope this statement clearly explains our decision and gives her some reassurance that the Trust has taken her complaint seriously.

1. We have carefully considered Mrs E’s complaint about Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). We are sorry to hear about her distressing experience and we understand she is concerned about the impact this will have on her in the future.

2. We are sorry to hear she feels the Trust mocked her and did not appropriately consider her medical history when it decided which medication to prescribe her to manage her symptoms.

3. We are pleased to see the Trust has already acknowledged and apologised to Mrs E about her poor experience. It has also added an alert to its system, reviewed her again and written to her GP to tell them the outcome. Based on this, we think the Trust has addressed what went wrong and the impact this had on Mrs E.

4. We hope our explanation below explains our decision not to take her complaint any further and gives her some reassurances.