9. Mr P complains the Trust repeatedly delayed completing his partner’s cardiac surgery and this continued for years, until they were told in March 2023 that he was no longer suitable for surgery. He is upset the Trust did not get a second opinion before making its decision. Mr P says when they would attend the Trust for consultations, they would be treated differently and with prejudice in comparison to other patients. They believe this was because of their sexual orientation and nationality.
10. In its complaint response the Trust apologises for their experience and for its delay in responding to Mr P’s complaint. It provided a timeline of events of Mr E’s clinical management from 2019 to March 2023, when it came to the decision that the risks of completing surgery were too high.
11. Mr P wanted an apology for the delayed surgery and decision not to go ahead with surgery. We can see the Trust has already apologised for their experience in the cardiac department and its decision to not do surgery. We think the Trust’s apology for this part of the complaint is appropriate.
12. There is nothing in the Trust’s response about Mr P’s experience when he and Mr E would attend the Trust.
13. We discussed the complaint with the Trust. It said from a review of its complaint file it seemed Mr P had not complained before about the discrimination they felt. The Trust said it would want the opportunity to respond to this and it would investigate and send a reply letter to Mr P and Mr E. We think this is appropriate and in line with our Complaint Standards Framework.
14. Our Complaints Standard Framework gives guidance on how organisations delivering NHS services in England should handle complaints. It states an effective complaint handling system should include promoting a learning and improvements culture, encourage feedback, be thorough and fair and give a fair and accountable decision. It specifically says organisations should make sure apologies and explanations are meaningful and sincere.