Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths · 2026-0134

“Having been made 'nil by mouth', the evidence was that this was well documented in Mr…”

Dated 16 Dec 2025, from the coroner for Kent and Medway. Sent to 1 organisation or person.

A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.

Read the full report on judiciary.uk

How this works

The 56-day response deadline

All responses published

Organisations 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.

  1. Report dated16 Dec 2025
  2. Deadline10 Feb 2026
  3. Published on judiciary.uk10 Mar 2026
  4. 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.

Next we ask your name, then send a link to confirm and create your free account. Already have an account? Sign in

Responses from each recipient

Responses from each recipient
Sent toResponse
Medway NHS Foundation TrustResponse publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in March 2026.

The coroner’s concerns

(1) Having been made 'nil by mouth', the evidence was that this was well documented in Mr Pollyn's records, a sign indicating that he was nil by mouth was placed above his bed, and the board within the ward kitchen was also updated. Despite this, the records indicate that numerous members of nursing staff ensured that water was placed at Mr Pollyn's bedside (which would be standard practice were Mr Pollyn not 'nil by mouth' at the time). While the Trust has updated the relevant policies and sought to disseminate messaging to staff in this regard, I was not reassured that this is solely a matter of policy. The number of staff involved and the period of time over which the issue of unsupervised access to water persisted is potentially suggestive of underlying attitudinal issues. (2) Following on from the above, I heard in evidence that the production of some patient records is a simple tick-box exercise, which is not a concern in itself. However, the impression created by the evidence was that staff members were ticking the box to indicate that water was placed/replaced at the bedside (and following through on that action) because that was the norm for most patients on the ward. This indicates that staff missed the entries in the notes about 'nil by mouth' and the other visual cues that were clear. While I heard that the Trust intends to undertake a review of record keeping, which may not be completed until March 2026, I was given insufficient reassurance that this specific concern is being addressed. 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 1st May 2026. 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, 2026-0134
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

AI

Summaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.

Sign in to use