“When giving consideration to writing a report to prevent future deaths Coroners are not…”
Dated 16 Jan 2018, from the coroner for Blackpool and Fylde. 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.
The 56-day response deadline
Deadline passedReplies were due by 13 Mar 2018. A reply may have been sent and not yet 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.
- Report dated16 Jan 2018
- Deadline13 Mar 2018
- Published on judiciary.uk8 Mar 2018
- Today22 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 |
|---|---|
| Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustNamed in the report as “Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust” | Response published, not yet matchedA response is published with this report. We haven’t yet matched it to the organisation it’s from, so it may be this one’s. |
Some responses were published as scans, so their text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.
The coroner’s concerns
When giving consideration to writing a report to prevent future deaths Coroners are not limited to deaths which are felt to have been contributed to by the issue causing the Coroner some concern. As stated above the expert opinion received at the inquest and accepted by the court was that a connection between Mr Harwood’s Parkinson’s disease and his cardiac arrest could not be established. However, I have concerns that despite the introduction of a Trust policy, the evidence heard at this inquest suggests that medical professionals may find themselves in a position whereby, as with events surrounding Mr Harwood’s care, they are faced with an unfamiliar condition and without being able to source the requisite (possibly urgent) specialist advice. The co-author of the SUI review was unsure about what assistance would be available particularly in relation to neurology input. I remain therefore concerned that a family such as Mr Harwood’s may find themselves being asked to educate medical staff about the potential implications of a certain condition.. At the conclusion of the inquest, I indicated to the Properly Interested Persons that I proposed to write to the Trust by way of a report in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 7 of Schedule 5 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
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, 2018-0017
- 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