“During the course of the inquest it became clear that Ella was a child in a complex…”
Dated 7 Feb 2025, from the coroner for Mid Kent and Medway. Sent to 3 organisations or people.
A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.
The 56-day response deadline
All responses publishedOrganisations that receive a report must reply to the coroner within 56 days, saying what they will do or why they will do nothing. We show whether a response is published on judiciary.uk; a reply may have been sent and not yet published.
- Report dated7 Feb 2025
- Deadline4 Apr 2025
- Published on judiciary.uk16 Apr 2025
- Today23 Oct 2026
Watch this report
We’ll email you when a response is published on judiciary.uk, or when the 56 days to reply end with none published there yet. Free, and you can stop with one click.
Responses from each recipient
| Sent to | Response |
|---|---|
| Department of Health and Social Care | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in April 2025. |
| NHS England | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in April 2025. |
| NHS Kent and Medway Integrated Care BoardNamed in the report as “Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board” | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in April 2025. |
The coroner’s concerns
– (1)During the course of the inquest it became clear that Ella was a child in a complex family situation and showing signs of deterioration of her mental health. Her school had raised concerns about her with social services and taken steps to make sure she was seen by healthcare professionals when she indicated to staff at school she wanted to end her life on 13 November 2023. She was assessed by mental health nursing staff and accepted to the caseload of the Intensive Home Treatment Team. She was seen the following day and told the staff nurse who saw her that she was frightened of her stepfather and had run away from home barefoot and police called but she was brought back home by her mother who “grabbed her face” the morning she was seen. She told the nurse that she did not want to be in the family home and would rather go to prison and would harm herself or others is she had to stay at home. (2) This disclosure led to the nurse making a Safeguarding Referral but this was made after she left Ella’s home and no urgent steps were taken to remove Ella either to a hospital bed or to ask social services to consider if she should be removed from the family home. Her school had raised concerns about her and she herself had indicated she wished to end her life. Evidence heard at the inquest was that this was the procedure in place and there is no shared access to records for all agencies and no way to convene an urgent multi-agency meeting to determine if Ella was safe to remain at home. Had steps been taken to share information between her school, social services and the mental health providers when she attend the emergency department on 13 November 2023 or early the following day rather than leave her at home she may have been removed from her home and may still be alive today. (3) Whilst there were concerns about the level of risk assessment undertaken on 14 November 2023 senior staff at the Trust gave evidence that she did not meet the criteria for admission to a hospital bed. This was difficult to reconcile with the documentary evidence as she was clearly crying out for help and her school had recognised this. No one agency involved had access to all the relevant information and concerns about Ella across the health, social care and education arenas. Evidence given suggested that shared records would assist but the ability to respond to urgent concerns would require a system change. (4)It was brought to the court’s attention that the new Children’s Wellbeing and Schools bill includes a duty to share information to promote safeguarding. In addition the local authority may convene a strategy meeting under s47 of the Children Act 1989 although the speed of convening a meeting would depend on availability and would obviously not be as swift as for example attending an accident and emergency department. If a multiagency meeting had been convened this may have prevented Ella’s death and such action may reduce the risk of death for other children being in a similar position. 6. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the power to take such action. 7. YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 4 April 2025. I, the coroner, may extend the period.
An extract. Read the full report, including the circumstances of the death, on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.
- Source
- judiciary.uk, Prevention of Future Deaths reports, 2025-0182
- Added to Minute Book
- 8 Oct 2026
- Reuse
- We show short extracts and link to the original. We don’t host the full report.
Something wrong, such as a date or who it was sent to? Report a mistake
Is this report about someone close to you? You can ask us to remove names from our pages.
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, judiciary.uk. Open Government Licence v3.0
Ask about this report
AISummaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.
Sign in to use