Mr and Mrs L complained that the Council and the Trust relied on a 'desktop assessment' that wrongly accused them of physically and emotionally abusing their daughter, Miss L, and withholding money from her. They said the assessment defamed their character, breached their confidentiality, and also led to the inappropriate withdrawal of mental health services for Miss L. This caused considerable distress to the whole family.
What happened
Miss L was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. She came under the care of the Trust's community mental health team (CMHT) between late 2008 and early 2009. In 2009, Miss L was assessed under the Mental Health Act and detained in hospital under section 3 for treatment. On discharge from hospital, Miss L received section 117 aftercare (which imposes a duty on health and social services to provide aftercare services to certain patients who have been detained under the Mental Health Act).
In early autumn 2010 the Council commissioned a desktop assessment (which involves an assessment of the papers on file) of Miss L's condition and needs. The report on this assessment was completed in late 2010 and shared with Miss L soon afterwards. Miss L was discharged from section 117 aftercare (and the Trust's care) at this time.
Mr and Mrs L said that the inappropriate withdrawal of mental health services left Miss L without the support she needed to help manage her condition. She was also 20 weeks pregnant at that time. The use of this assessment also had a lasting impact on their family because the views expressed about Mr and Mrs L in the assessment questioned their ability to care for their grandchild (Miss L's child), which was subject to an investigation by the Council.
By bringing their complaint to us, Mr and Mrs L wanted the people responsible for completing the desktop assessment to be held accountable. They also wanted a financial payment to reflect the injustice caused to them.
What we found
We investigated this complaint jointly with the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) because it concerned the actions of a local authority as well as an NHS organisation.
We found that the Council and the Trust were at fault in creating a desktop assessment that relied heavily on the authors' personal opinions, rather than the available evidence. The impact of the assessment was far–reaching because there was evidence to show it influenced Miss L's discharge from section 117 of the Mental Health Act, and restricted access to the aftercare she was entitled to receive. The inaccurate views expressed about Mr and Mrs L also raised questions about their ability to care for their grandchild.
Putting it right
The Trust and the Council accepted that the assessment was flawed. They both acknowledged the injustice caused to the family and apologised, and each made a payment of £5,000 to Mr and Mrs L in recognition of the impact the flawed assessment had on the family.
The Trust and the Council also produced action plans to address the faults we identified.
Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust
Wiltshire
Did not take sufficient steps to improve service
Did not apologise properly or do enough to put things right
Apology
Compensation for non-financial loss
Recommendation to learn lessons or draw up an action plan