“Access to means of self-harm on the ward”
Dated 12 Apr 2019, from the coroner for Buckinghamshire. 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
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 dated12 Apr 2019
- Deadline7 Jun 2019
- Published on judiciary.uk14 Jun 2019
- 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 |
|---|---|
| Oxford Health NHS Foundation TrustNamed in the report as “Oxford Health NHS Trust” | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in June 2019. |
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
This report was published as a scan, so its text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.
— (1) Access to means of self-harm on the ward. Whilst evidence was given as to the difficulty of reducing access to materials of self-harm without restricting fundamentally the rights and activities of patients, it was clear that incidences of self-harm had, on occasions related to the procuring of, concealment of and use of plastic cutlery available to patients on Ruby for self-cutting. The process appears reliant upon voluntary surrender of such items or on their being found rather than on the monitoring of the handing out and proper return of all such items in the context of use at mealtimes. There is a risk of self-harm within the patient cohort on Ruby Ward. (2) Access to means of self-harm from outside the ward. The processes for searching and seizing potential self-harm material after return from unescorted leave did not prevent items being brought in from the outside at risk to the particular patient, other patients and staff and the evidence regarding the extent of strip or other searches from staff members was variable. The risk of items being brought onto the ward from outside for use by that patient or others remains where the system for searching and the nature and extent of that search has not prevented the introduction of such items. The understanding of and compliance with specific conditions of leave in the context of searches was unclear. (3) General observations. The process for conducting and recording hourly observations left scope for significant variation on the actual time between and the manner in which such observations of a particular patient were undertaken and recorded. There was an indication that this would be reviewed but the risk remains of an incident of planned or spontaneous self-harm occurring between observations for a patient not on a higher level of observations. (4) Urgent or emergency access to the ward phone. The concern remains that a patient Coroner’s Office, 29 Windsor End, Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire. HP9 2JJ Tel: (01494) 475505 Fax: (01494) 673760 E Mail: coroners@buckscc.gov.uk D D, SEO mh OQ, ET MON, C.G.BUTLER SENIOR CORONER + BUCKINGHAMSHIRE on unescorted leave outside the Centre who felt they were going to self- harm or who had self-harmed may not get immediate access to support or assistance by calling the specific ward number given to them. Whilst the evidence indicated the balance between positive risk taking, unescorted leave and taking responsibility for decisions and actions, the risk remains that the safety net is not sufficiently robust to ensure that if such a potentially fatal incident occurs, or is likely to occur, a patient can self- alert the ward and expect to receive an immediate response. (5) Planning for discharge. The evidence indicated the move towards and importance of shorter periods of admission and planning for discharge into the community. However, the process for keeping all aspects under review and communicating decision-making within the team and with the patient was unclear. The potential lack of certainty and structure in relation to ongoing assessment of risk, leave decisions and monitoring of medication effectiveness is of continuing concern in relation to the management of the risks and behaviour of a patient with personality disorder progressing towards discharge.
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
- 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