When things go wrong under care Professionals do not apologise. Instead they try everything to cover up what has gone wrong and they do this by sticking together and playing on confidentiality. They may use techniques such as gaslighting, coercion and bullying to silence a vulnerable person and their families which could ultimately culminate in safeguarding. However I found the safeguarding minutes – all centred on me, full of lies and I reported them to the Police. I don’t know where to start with all the inaccuracies within medical files but here are a few good examples where everyone is desperately sticking together:
SM (AMHP) visited Elizabeth at her previous scheme and Elizabeth was dragged to four safeguarding meetings. I have two sets of minutes and when I requested the third and fourth minutes I received them with practically everything blocked out. They also tried to do safeguarding back in 2014 but Elizabeth wanted nothing to do with Enfield Community Rehab (ECRT) who took us to Ct of Protection in 2014 to force her back into care at Phoenix House Stepping Stones in Northampton and it was made impossible for me to obtain Clozapine anywhere locally so I had to go to Harley St. During this time we had regular visits by the team as titration had to be done from scratch in the end.
I will now feature the reporting that went on during this time and the connections between everyone – practically all who are still involved today and I see they are now promoted up the ranks.
This is from the Safeguarding Report of 2014.
“Family did not allow Enfield Community Rehab to access either physically or by telephone.”
Nominated Advocate involved? – “no – this could not be arranged because advocates will only take referrals with consent from service users and it was not possible for ECRT to get access to adult at risk to ascertain their consent.” – ECRT infiltrated the Home Treatment Team and came to my home trying to carry out capacity assessments on several occasions in front of my carers reporting deliberately negatively everything for court purposes and asking intrusive questions of Elizabeth, putting notes through the door, phoning etc all in front of close friends and neighbours/family who were helping at the time.
Has the Allegation been substantiated? – “no”.
Has the keep safe pack been sent out to the adult at risk? “yes” – completed with them “no”.
If no why? – Because it has still not been possible for ECRT to have access to Elizabeth at the time of this report – Legal procedures are still ongoing.”
Date Adult at risk or representative informed of outcome: – “N/A ECRT have not been able to make correspondence with adult at risk. Legal procedures ongoing.”
Current Situation (as at 15.5.14 ) HTT to continue monitoring and supervise medication daily to enable adult at risk to maintain a stable mental health.
LBE has filed case to Ct of Protection and first hearing has been heard in June – waiting for court to order the next hearing.
Lesson Learnt: – “the need to be vigilant with perceived incidents and put protective measures earlier at hand to prevent that incident from occurring.”
Signed by EJ (CC) 14.07.14 and LO (Manager ECRT) 24.07.14
RIO FILE NOTES:
“Mother has made it very clear to HTT that she does not want the Clozapine dose increased beyond 100mg per day. Today’s Clozapine dose is supposed to be 50mg mane and 75mg nocte which is more than the dose allowed by Elizabeth’s mother. Under the circumstances HTT has no further role.”
However the Manager of HTT Dr HM agreed to allow access to ECRT with their nurses in order to report for court purposes so the various teams were working together. “Go in twos and report every word that mother says”.
Joint visit by HTT and Rehab Team to assess the situation and establish Elizabeth’s capacity.
LM Deputy Team Manager to contact the manager of the Rehab Team (LO) to work out best way forward:
“We recommend MHA assessment for the mother with the help of GP (to be organised by the Rehab Team).
SOVA to be raised
Consider physically separating them through legal process/transferring Elizabeth back to Northampton.
Consider transferring Elizabeth’s care back to rehab team.
NB: Staff to be aware that Elizabeth’s mother is documenting all visits by staff on her blog psychiatric abuse uk.
Note: From Dr DI to Manager of ECRT and JE (CC)of ECRT – Dated 30.05.14
“Social worker E A was advised by the HTT and Elizabeth would not be able to meet us this afternoon but as planned we attended her home. We were advised by a man who said he was a lodger that Elizabeth was not at home and we therefore did not have the opportunity of carry out the assessment.” Elizabeth does not like meetings and did not wish to attend and my lodger was instructed by her to say she was out.
From LO to Dr DI cc JE and there is another familiar name mentioned NJ – also a manager of ECRT: “Dear I – thanks for informing me – I have spoken to A……. and will relate the issue to the legal team.
Email from EJ ECRT “received an email I was copied into from Stepping Stones with details for a SOVA being carried out – alleged sexual abuse – see uploaded information on documents.”
“Ring Stepping Stones to find our more info and ascertain if there is a date given for the next CPA.
“Very good plan CT…. (Manager of Stepping Stones) – kindly give me an update of how her time away was when she returns. EJ – dated 11.04.14 at 13.56
The above is very disturbing. This is a team of professionals working together to destroy someone’s character – I phoned the police – I am still waiting from LS for the Police report number – there was no such serious incident and it is most worrying that they should stoop to this level to destroy a vulnerable person.
Originator EJ 21.05.14 “following difficulties the ECRT is facing in regards to carry out a MCA with Elizabeth to ascertain her decision as to – where she wants to live as she still has a placement at Northampton – how she wishes to be cared for – whom she should have contact with. ECRT has sort – sought advice from the legal department to Legal team RH who will see the application to court. PLAN – waiting to hear feedback from court through legal team.
A negative report from E.N – from ECRT ……“door was opened by Elizabeth and her mother contemporaneously upon my arrival. Her mother had shown me a note left by Team manager (one of several) She stated “look at this – how could she drop a letter through my letter box – this is bullying. She went on to state her solicitors and MP would be notified and threatened writing about it on her blog adding the manager was not welcome at her house. As she continued ranting Elizabeth sat passively looking down spirited and pleaded with her mother to stop but she ignored her. At that point I told her it was not fair on E as she appeared visible distressed. I told her to respect E’s feelings and her opinion to which she retorted “you are all working together” – a lot of this is untrue but I do admit to saying “this is bullying” “you are all working together” – also this was one of about three notes and Elizabeth didn’t want to see them. She was having to go through titration of clozapine from scratch because no one could be bothered to help us getting this drug locally and Elizabeth did not wish to go back to her placement in Northampton where none of us could get through on the phone all of sudden due to a bad signal. I felt they were arranging a CTO “you are not the next of kin – we are not speaking to you” – this is what I was told by Stepping Stones Phoenix House – a care home rated “good” by CQC and at this care home hundreds of miles from home Elizabeth did not have enough money to buy food at the weekend and went without. This is mentioned in the files that she must watch her foods so she does not go without. Apalling – this care home cost c£70000 per year and probably even more on top. They were in fact arranging a CTO which costs more money to put in place.
Dr W.O’s email notes (Originator JE) (correspondence sent from Stepping Stones forwarded by G.N – MH social work with children and Adults of Stepping Stones dated 03.02.14 …“Yes I shall be happy to manage this lady on CTO. I indeed consider a CTO to be absolutely appropriate for her based on concerns by her discharging RC regarding concordance – I think this was Dr AW from Cambian RC mysteriously left all of a sudden after returning from maternity leave. “If she was to miss taking her Clozapine for more than 48 hrs the CPMS guidance would require it to be titrated all over again from the lowest dose. You will also be aware that S17 leave cannot be extended beyond 7 days unless there is explicit intention to consider a move to S17A CTO. I can confirm my earlier thoughts of financial implication if a CTO is considered as given costs on initial assessment did not consider a CTO – this will mean extra charges for consultation work to be covered by Dr O. The initial charges will not change.
“Thank you G – could you please confirm the extra costs that will be incurred if a CTO goes ahead as I will need to take it to our resource panel again to request for the extra costs – EJ”
My attempts to get Clozapine on the fourth day at the local Lloyds Pharmacy failed “cannot dispense Clozaril as GP not registered to prescribe – referred to Chase Farm MH. For a long time the pharmacist was on the telephone and I spent nearly all morning in there. He was talking to someone and then I was given this news. His report is dated 13.05.14 and by the way it was 26 hrs without clozapine NOT 48 hrs when I was trying to get the drug Clozapine back then so totally
I had written to all of the Councillors for help :
Email from Cllr CS to DCS dated 13.05.14
J asked me to pass this to you. the original email is at the bottom of the trail and I suspect J has got it right when she says there is probably nothing she can do. “
Email from J…. “This sounds like a custody battle between parents” – well I’m afraid this shows why you should never assume and this is why I took the opportunity to attend the scrutiny meeting – Not one person did anything at this crucial time when I was trying to get hold of this chemical – nobody cared. It was NOT a custody battle between parents it was a battle between ECRT and a team of professionals all working together which prevented Elizabeth from getting the drug Clozapine for 4 days hence my story “GET HER BACK WE’RE PAYING FOR THAT” which I presented to the Scrutiny meeting.
Whilst titration of Clozapine took place over about two weeks involving twice a day visits from nurses, I had to rely on friends and family to help me to spend all day with Elizabeth and this is what one carer overheard: – “it wont be long before E.J…. comes to get you and returns you to your placement”. Well would any one of the team wish to be at such a placement where you are asked to choose between parents “its not fair Mum – a nurse is putting pressure on me to choose between you and my Dad” “I don’t want to go back there – I am not happy there” .
Dr HM who was most recently the RC was involved back in 2014 as permission was sought for her team to infiltrate the HTT.
Dated 10.06.14 – Email from Dr HM to Dr IM and JE (CC) I saw LS today and she is aware of the current situation. Unfortunately, a friend of Mrs Bevis did arrive and sat at the Chase building. They did inform my team but somehow we did not get the message. I went to see him and he was very understanding. E has a particular problem waiting in for the HTT as we often do not get there to supervise morning meds until after midday. The family feels very strongly about it so as a compromise I have agreed that we will supervise evening meds only.” So we had to wait in all day long for them to arrive and then be back for early evening in time for their next visit and whilst it was agreed that this would now be done once a day, the team tried to take away the medication to resume their visits twice daily once again.
An email by HK – AMHP of ECRT of 8th October describes my home, which was being decorated, at the time in not a nice way. In addition, my carer is described as being “hostile and aggressive” as no one was notified of another visit by them until that same day. He did grant them access and Elizabeth sat down with them in my living room. This social worker also described Elizabeth in an unflattering way which is a disgrace. “overweight in face and body” – “red mark on her chin and forehead – stained nails due to nicotine” – what a pack of lies this is because Elizabeth did not smoke – she gave up smoking immediately when she came home but the team failed to monitor this. She then goes onto state “she was calling to the cat who ignored her!” – what has this got to do with anything? perhaps Elizabeth felt like speaking to the cat instead of AMHP HK – and probably got more sense out of the cat. Who could blame her when such nasty remarks are recorded? As regards my carer it is recorded that HK did not feel that the carer prevented Elizabeth from speaking but that she was mindful of the fact the carer was listening to her views and words. Elizabeth was afraid to go out anywhere alone and she suffered agoraphobia and there was absolutely no assistance – when we knew we were being taken to court yet again how could any of us trust the team. We tried to get direct payments to provide care support workers but this was refused. We had to rely on the kindness of friends and close family and even neighbours tried to help during that very difficult time.
The care coordinator MA has just been replaced by another care coordinator called PM. The last CC was involved when Elizabeth was at Cambian. Here are examples of how the team work together.
Email from MA re PG Social care consultant Commisioning continuing Health Team. “received an email message from P to say he will not be attending the meeting but will try to visit in January 2013.
Email from MA dated 29.11.2012 – I’m attending Elizabeth’s managers hearing at St Teilos in Wales on 6th December at 10.00 am.” There is other communication regarding COP being different to Jones Manual. Wales AMHP services will not carryout the MHA assessment if the person is from another Borough but will consider in some cases depending on circumstances.
In an email dated 7.11.2012 – Elizabeth’s MHRT has been cancelled by her mother’s solicitors – yes – as the Hospital Managers would not pass on file correspondence. Her mother has requested an independent assessment report – it is unclear the type of report she is seeking. Well that report was done by Dr Bob Johnson. I’ll never forget the day of his visit to Cambian. We booked into our usual accommodation – a lovely farm house in Wales and we asked for Elizabeth to stay with us. When Elizabeth was first sent to Cambian we were not even allowed in the same room alone and a member of staff stood over us. However it was about 18 months now – so she was finally allowed to stay with us and on returning her to Cambian she sat in the car outside whilst I waited inside the building for Dr J to arrive. Suddenly a member of the team realised that Elizabeth was not with me and when they realised she was in the car outside with a friend, they pushed past me and marched out to the car demanding Elizabeth come inside. Just at that moment Dr Johnson was coming down the road and I was so relieved as they could have given drugs to Elizabeth making the visit of Dr Johnson and his assessment impossible. Whilst Elizabeth was seeing Dr J I was told that the Tribunal was arranged the next day so I got my solicitor to cancel this. To think they were going to hold this without me as the NR present.
When I asked CC MA about whether they were trying to displace me as NR because I had suffered difficulty in contacting my daughter and was allocated supervised phone calls – that is until my solicitor wrote to the CEO of Enfield Barnet & Haringey MH Trust – MK. I was told there were no plans to displace me in an email however I see another email in the files stating “There have been lots of communications with Cambian for the displacements of the N/R. I’m seeking advice from Enfield legal team on this matter”. Email dated 08.11.12 from MA to DM (East Enfield) – (DM was originally nominated NR) in most recent RcJ court proceedings. “Hi D I spoke with GW our legal team and informed her about the current situations. I have sent to G all communications I had from Cambian, Mrs Bevis and her lawyer. G suggested I should start to write chronology of the events of the case in respect of displacement. Meanwhile G would be making contact with the other agency to speed up the process. I will keep you updated with any information I get” MA (ECHR).
Thank you letter to Cambian from PG Social care consultant commissioning. Continuing Health Care team.
The last paragraph states “I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for the service you have provided to this patient to this time and for the progress “he” has made.” What progress! Elizabeth called it “prison” and she was not even allowed to go out to the corner shop alone. We were all concerned at her decline and the drug Clozapine was increased to 350 by Dr AW who later mysteriously disappeared having returned from maternity leave.
Whilst I had the tribunal appeal which was spread out over two days and involved two separate visits to Wales was successful Elizabeth could not come home as it was decided that was not best interest but I was just glad to get her out of that prison Cambian St Teilo house and felt she would be less restricted and a bit nearer home as it was costing us a fortune to travel down, book in hotels etc over 18 months and not one bit of help from Enfield.
Here is the response when we jointly requested the files:
From LL – PA to LS having been forwarded request by Dr DI. “it came from CD’s office.
“Hi L I cannot open the attachment – who is asking for access to the notes? regards Dr ID
From LL dated 08.09.14 “Hi H and I “where is L when you need her – she is on annual leave this week and have just received this application to view Elizabeth’s notes. I see that you have seen her in the HTT and that I is having a meeting with LS when she returns so am of the view to wait and not progress this application yet. Can I have your views please”
From VB dated 10.08.11 Re Ombudsman to CD, Dr AA and LS “Hi C ….I dont know if A sent Mrs B copy of his report. He did the report because everyone wanted Mrs B to be classified as a vexatious complainant and I said this couldn’t be done until someone went right through all her complaints and checked that they had all been answered and that she didn’t raise anything new.”
Right now PHSO are so inundated with complaints that there is not one investigator available according to Theresa Davey – they already have all the details/information. Such is the extent of the information that the PHSO have twice tried to back out of the complaint – I get the feeling that PHSO do not wish to take on our complaint particularly as there are private advocates involved who are witness to everything. Far from being a vexatious complainant, all I want is for my daughter to be treated fairly – matters would not have reached this stage had professionals apologised or acknowledged that things have gone wrong more than once. The reason I persist is because they choose to ignore, to play on confidentiality, to try to pass the buck. No-one wishes to take any responsibility and I feel this is very wrong and that they seem to be unaccountable because I have other emails that show people not wishing to take responsibility and leaving one person to blame in an investigation by PHSO.
One of the greatest defenders of “excellent care” under Barnet Enfield and Haringey MH Trust was CEO MK. I have not even had the courtesy of a response to my letter dated 07 December 2015 – the word “satisfied” is mentioned in her response – satisfied with everything. The team will hide behind confidentiality to protect themselves so I see.
MOST RECENT COURT ACTION 2017 RcJ
The case was brought against me by SM, AMHP – Barnet Enfield & Haringey MH Trust for being “unreasonable to object to S3” A Barring Order was issued and extremely negative reports written on Elizabeth’s return from Huntercombe when she has returned to the ward drugged up on both Clonazepam and Risperidone. This was sprung on me at short notice I turned up at the wrong court as I was given the wrong court number. I attended just 1 hearing. Elizabeth was treated like she was invisible by the LBE but the Judge wanted to meet her to hear what she wanted as regards my displacement as NR and I thought that was very fair of him.
I presented lots of evidence as to why LBE were not suitable to act as NR. I produced two Witness Statement and two Particulars of Claim because I had to correct their documents as well as present my own. Noone (apart from Elizabeth’s father) was asked if he would take my place as NR. The cost for this first Hearing was £380 but I dont know how much the second Hearing was. I presented vast evidence to the wrong Judge when I turned up at the wrong court who went out of her way to help me but couldn’t find anything listed on their computer system – when I later turned up at Chase Farm Hospital to visit Elizabeth- SM (AMHP) waved a piece of paper at us and asked me to leave the room but when I refused as I was visiting her first SM announced – “LBE is now your Nearest Relative – your mother has been displaced by the Court. Lets face it she was not suitable -or words to this effect. The next Hearing took Place two weeks later and I was criticised for doing my two witness statements and two Particulars of Claim but I never represented myself in court before and felt that all of the evidence needed to be accurately altered and so I did this. It is not true that Elizabeth’s sister did not wish to be NR and I enclosed with my evidence to the court the fact that Elizabeth’s sister was not even asked by ECHT. Dr S (Independent Psychiatrist) carried out a capacity assessment which my therapist who was visiting with me on the ward observed and found Dr S to be an extremely good psychiatrist and very fair. The results were that Elizabeth was found to have capacity and she appointed the same solicitors that were originally appointed at Huntercombe. The fact of the matter is that Elizabeth and her sister were advised that “your mother will lose in court and be faced with enormous costs” – that is the real reason why Elizabeth chose her sister as no one wanted LBE to be NR as they are far from what they describe themselves as being : “Enfield Council is committed to serve the whole Borough fairly, delivering excellent services and building strong communities” I have to say though that there is a new Leader to the Council who has very kindly tried to help/take interest when I sent her pictures of Elizabeth sleeping on the floor as the settee was uncomfortable due to bed bugs that had affected other residents too. Now Elizabeth is facing eviction:
In a letter from the Manager of Simicks Care Ltd dated 18th May 2018 “Please accept this letter as our formal notification to terminate your tenancy at …………. Your last day at the property is 15 June 2018. Please ensure all your belongings have been removed from the room by mid-day on this day.”
The eviction is because they do not like the fact that I have complained about the conditions there and the way residents were deprived of the basics.
Looking in the local area there are some very nice private properties for rent where Elizabeth could have her new furniture that we currently have stuck in our lounge. This scheme where she is currently residing has 24 hr staff present but not all of them engage with the residents. Elizabeth needs someone to help her in the community but she is just signposted to MH schemes but she needs specific help and understanding with regard to communication. I am in effect cut out by the team and not invited to any meetings and was not allowed in the most recent tribunal despite Elizabeth’s request. The team have concentrated on communication with Elizabeth’s sister who I delegted my role as nearest relative to so in effect I have been forced out of the picture.
It is very disturbing what is going on under Enfield MH. When Elizabeth wanted me at the Tribunal in the absence of her sister who could not attend I was blocked from attending and TM – Manager of MHA Office called security as I took a photo of the sign on her office door (not of any people – but the sign) – I was threatened with arrest. I had tried to hand my corrected version of the CTO papers and care plan “I am not speaking to you as you are not the NR”. This same person or so I believe is recorded in files going way back as being a “therapist” now it would appear she is in charge of the MHA Office.
I had written below to the Tribunals Office:
Sent: 21 March 2018 01:02
To: ‘TSMH_Case_Progression@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk’ <TSMH_Case_Progression@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>
Subject: ATT DIANE BURTON COMMS & CORRES TEAM FIRST TIER TRIBUNAL (Mental Health) – EB
Miss EB has shared all information with her mother and former Nearest Relative.
C – (NEAREST RELATIVE) is away on holiday this week and unable to attend and EB has appointed some new solicitors.
I have taken the day off work to ensure that E is taken to meet the Doctor first of all and then she has decided to attend the Tribunal however I have seen with horror some shocking comments in the care plan and CTO Report.
I have a legal adviser myself but in the meantime I am sending the corrected versions and I have contacted one of those people who are entering diagnoses and TK knew nothing about any entries. There are defamatory comments about EB and the report is deliberately written giving totally false impression that it is bound to fail and so I have corrected these papers and will be seeking advice from my legal representative about the most shocking comments on alleged sexual abuse. I want those false comments removed and if this report comes from the Enfield Community Rehab Team then they are responsible for providing it and need to correct the false entries accordingly.
My daughter is not of any risk to self or others, never had an illicit drug/alcohol dependency and never self-harmed and most importantly has never sexually abused a child and it is not the first time I have seen alleged sexual abuse and plan mentioned. So I have reported this to the Police and I want those papers amended by Enfield Community Rehab who are using the CTO to threaten and bully and I do not like this one bit. For this reason the CTO should be lifted as the CTO is not being used properly by professionals who constantly threaten recall.
So I thought everything was cut and dried as far as legal action is concerned but I have now had several emails from the Legal Adviser of Enfield Council. Attached was another consent order and below here is my response as I had already sent the legal adviser a consent order last year crossing out “Respondent shall pay the applicant’s costs”. Here is my response to that legal adviser.
I have already sent you the consent order which I had to correct as you were threatening me with costs.
The fact is that Miss ……… was not asked if she would be prepared to act as NR yet it states in the court papers she was asked and was not interested which is not true. The matter was not communicated to myself or Elizabeth in the first place (who was wrongly excluded from proceedings by your clients -LBE) DM was appointed in my absence as nominal NR when I was given the wrong court number to attend and proceedings took place behind my back. The court action on my displacement brought about by SM should never have taken place as you can see I signed the consent order you originally sent and would not have objected in the first place to her being delegated the role of NR temporarily.
I have been threatened with enormous costs not only by LO of ECRT (who said I had lost the case) but you yourself quoted a figure of up to £5000 so I signed the attached. It was never the LA’s intention that C would be NR in the first place by your clients but Elizabeth took the advice of her solicitors for her sister to be NR if I agreed to delegate. Both Elizabeth and C were told I would get enormous costs and lost in court so they acted upon E’s Legal Adviser’s guidance in this respect.
The entire court action was therefore unnecessary and costs could have been avoided if there had been proper communication by your clients in the first instance but inaccurate reporting by Ms SM resulted in such court action whereas I would not have fought my daughter for the role of NR in court had this been considered in the first place.”
I am trying to figure out why the legal department is now after another consent order when I signed and amended the original back in 2017. He says it is to avoid going back to court again but the legal adviser said he is going to court very shortly. I do not understand as I did as I was told and was not being unreasonable as I sent this back promptly last year with the paragraph crossed out “The Respondent shall pay the Applicant’s costs” .
This whole business is making me question all the more now as to the whole procedure of displacing me as NR. I felt that the Tribunal was fixed in such a way as DM (AMHP)was recorded as being NR – whilst Elizabeth had been told to sign yet another consent form stating she did not want me to see the files, in front of one of her carers she asked if I wanted to see the Tribunal CTO papers and care plan to which I said “yes please” and it is a good job that Elizabeth wished for me to see these papers littered with lies and inaccuracies as I have been able to thoroughly correct them and most importantly amend the NR details incorrectly recorded. LBE’s Legal Adviser was meant to go back to court in January so I am very curious to know why he did not present the original consent order.
I have never in my life had to stand up for myself in court. I have never been bullied so much and certainly never thought this bullying would come from professionals who are supposed to be there to care. When I saw the court papers full of inaccuracies and all the lies I felt in the name of justice I had to try and correct these lies. I did not expect to hear anything more about this case as far as I am concerned – they got what they wanted but failed to get rid of me entirely as NR.
Despite winning the safeguarding complaint through the PHSO, SM and DM visited Elizabeth alone whilst in hospital and they both wrote an extremely negative report which I showed Elizabeth who denied saying things therein. She said they visited her when she was not feeling at all well and despite winning the case of the safeguarding – neither one of these AMHPs considered that Elizabeth should have an Advocate present – all they wanted was to win the case however the Judge at RcJ was extremely fair. Quite rightly the Judge wanted to meet Elizabeth. The fact that Elizabeth was disregarded and treated like an invisible object by LBE they thought they could easily win but the Judge wanted to hear Elizabeth’s decision. Elizabeth would never have displaced me as the NR had she not been advised to. Elizabeth’s sister would have acted as NR (if I agreed to this delegation) however I was never asked in this respect and neither was Elizabeth’s sister so it is not true to say that she was not interested to be NR. It was only when Elizabeth’s legal adviser recommended that the best solution was to choose her sister because otherwise I would face enormous costs. I was informed by that Legal Adviser it was what Elizabeth wanted – so you can see that the whole Tribunal/Court System is flawed. A Judge does not have the remit to look into matters beyond whether he considers if I am in fact “unreasonable”. I had said “no” to S3 because it would have meant six months or more stuck on acute wards where I could see Elizabeth going downhill as in this volatile environment Elizabeth had been beaten up and that is why she was transferred to Edgware Trent Ward. She was threatened by one RC to be thrown out on the street homeless if she did not choose her father as NR. She was also forcibly dragged by three members of staff to a seclusion room for an injection because she threw a bag out when disturbed during the night when a male nurse came into her shared room with another patient. What mother would have wished their son or daughter to be in hospitals such as this where the care is brutal and centred around drugging. Anyway my decision to object to S3 led to a Barring Order and yet more court action was thrown at me without being given hardly any notice and as already reported, I was told I would have the details in the morning of where proceedings would take place but instead I had to phone the legal dept to find out these details and all they could give me was the Court (RcJ) and time so I had very little time to even get up there to the court.
There is something else I would like to add to this blog but I need to find it amongst my records. I will come back to this later and as regards my last blog on Huntercombe Hospital I will also add my email to the Doctors.
Elizabeth has had a good time away with other family members – her room has been fumigated or so I assume for the fourth time. I am concerned at the chemicals if that room has not been ventilated in Elizabeth’s absence. Elizabeth has been by the sea and I have heard from her to say she is having a great time. I have spent most of my time washing thoroughly her clothes and have most of her possessions round at my home.
Safeguarding is one-sided and it is frightening what the outcome could be and that is why I wasted no time to report the minutes and file notes to Police who seemed in actual fact sympathetic towards me – I was told recently by the Manager of SS that I would make a good detective – well I will take this as a compliment as this is what I wanted to be at one time but my investigations have recently been centred on Council and Trust as there are claims there is no money in the area but there there seems to be a bottomless pit of money to waste in the wrong direction by ECRT.
I think it terrible the way ENFIELD COUNCIL treat the weak and vulnerable and carers. Elizabeth’s sister lives a long distance away and she has been told things like “everything has been dealt with” with regard to the bed bugs- this was not true. I have been told that three new beds have been ordered – not true. I was also told “the room is safe – the bed is OK” – when now I have seen this is not the case. I have also pointed out that the residents of the scheme are treated like nothing and I think that Councillors should go out of their way to visit such schemes to see if any of the residents wish to vote and to check on their wellbeing in person.
I have heard this scheme is costing over £500 pw. The cost of the CCG’s funding is £300 but the rest then must come from the LA and who else? I would like to know how much everything costs as I suspect this is more like £1-2000 per week per person and I am also interested in how much the court action is costing in total particularly when nothing should have been brought to court in the first place however I know very well that if words had not been put in Elizabeth’s head by her legal adviser she would not have gone through the displacement of me as NR.
It is not my giving up the role of NR it is principle in that Elizabeth has not been treated fairly and now it seems like no one wishes to take any responsibility. They just want to get rid of you and that is the goal. All of this comes before any level of care. This is not “care” this is abuse. I really tried to get the drug Clozapine back in 2014 not because I wanted Elizabeth to have this but because you cannot just come off it and it seems like everyone was blocking my every attempt to get this for Elizabeth whichever way I turned. The care home Manager (CT) and RMN refused to supply the drug when I offered to drive hundreds of miles to pick it up. The local area of Enfield also refused to supply the drug even though it was only 26 weeks and it was entirely unnecessary to start from scratch. It was only when they could see I was not taking her back and it was four days that a Dr and AMHP E.J turned up and Elizabeth did not wish to see them – to think they wanted me out of the room so they could do an assessment on someone who was not feeling very well.
The most important improvement Enfield can make is on communication and inclusion – if this was private sector there is no way that this kind of treatment would be allowed to go on but because this is vulnerable patients, some cannot complain and so are being abused by the very people who are assigned to care for them either through their neglect, bullying, deprival of liberty and forced treatment with the team writing defamatory comments as who would ever think these comments will get seen but if you dare to challenge any kind of abuse the team will be trying to sever contact with you as family and here are the consequences of this abuse of power under one-sided biased safeguarding:
Removal from property/support advice, services
Management of access to adult at risk
Referral to ISA/Regulatory Body
Referral to court mandated treatment / MAPPA
Action under MHA 2007 etc.
CONCLUSION – Enfield Council and Trust were found to be in breach of their own code of conduct and they were forced to apologise to me following PHSO’s recent investigation. However that is only one part of my complaint – they have details of the rest of it.
When it is Professionals who are in breach of the following there is no criticism. There is no admission of any kind of wrong doing.
Art 8 HRA
Art 3 HRA
Sect 117 MHA
There is an apology letter re legal detention being unlawful.
Defamation of Character
It is impossible to get justice in the UK even when someone dies under care. There is no legal aid cover if you have assets and when you try to defend yourself in court my blog sadly describes the true reality.
If only there was Open Dialogue and inclusion – there needs to be accountability as this is public money being wasted when it could go to the marvellous voluntary organisations in Enfield and on improving care in the community, better facilities than acute wards should be offered but for an enormous amount of money there is no recognition in terms of inadequacy – the wards do not offer a therapeutic environment and the money that has been wasted should go on improving care in the community and stopping people like Elizabeth returning to hospital.
I along with so many others want to see the right changes to the MHA so that vulnerable people are treated fairly along with their carers and for change to happen there needs to be recognition and accountability.