As deaths in mental health custody rise in British hospitals, the family of a woman who died a year ago today carry on a campaign for justice. Sandra Jean Allen died on 2nd October 2006 after systemic problems with her mental healthcare. Supporters of the campaign are urged to join at 
http://justice4sandra.blogspot.com or to email 
steven.allen@gmail.com
http://justice4sandra.blogspot.com or to email steven.allen@gmail.com
On 2nd October 2006, Sandra Jean Allen, a frail and vulnerable mental health patient died whilst in the custody of the Highgate Mental Health Centre in North London. The circumstances of her death raise important questions for today's mental health sector as her complex needs were unable to be properly cared for, nurses were untrained in basic and advanced life-support, and a security guard was sleeping whilst she was choking, denying urgent ambulance access.
During her inpatient stay at the Centre under s.3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 she repeatedly suffered assaults from other patients, extremely high levels of tranquillising drug treatment and an environment of fear and force.
Whilst most deaths in custody - running at the rate of over 600 a year to April 2007 (see http://www.preventingcustodydeaths.org.uk/) the investigation of Sandra's death shows the failures of the coronial system for holding the state to account.
Since her death, Sandra's family have been campaigning to have the circumstances of her death properly investigated. After her death the Coroner for Inner North London, Dr. Andrew Reid opened an inquest into her death. However, in the most discreditable of proceedings and with the most appalling of conduct, the Coroner refused to hear any of the family's evidence, being solely focussed on a restrictive medical cause of death.
In denying justice to the family of the deceased, the Coroner refused to call a jury to hear the relevant evidence in the case, and even said that the Human Rights Act did not apply to the proceedings. Indeed the Coroner refused to hear evidence against the hospital and mental health trust where Sandra died despite voluminous evidence showing institutional failings to protect her life.
On the first anniversary of Sandra's death, her family are issuing Judicial Review proceedings at the High Court to have Dr. Reid's proceedings quashed and a fresh inquest ordered. Mind, the mental health charity, have been supporting the family's calls for justice and the family's legal team believe that the case could be important in changing the way that deaths in mental hospitals are investigated in Britain.
Interested people are urged to visit the family's blog at http://justice4sandra.blogspot.com and to sign up for email updates, or alternatively to email steven.allen@gmail.com.
During her inpatient stay at the Centre under s.3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 she repeatedly suffered assaults from other patients, extremely high levels of tranquillising drug treatment and an environment of fear and force.
Whilst most deaths in custody - running at the rate of over 600 a year to April 2007 (see
http://www.preventingcustodydeaths.org.uk/) the investigation of Sandra's death shows the failures of the coronial system for holding the state to account. Since her death, Sandra's family have been campaigning to have the circumstances of her death properly investigated. After her death the Coroner for Inner North London, Dr. Andrew Reid opened an inquest into her death. However, in the most discreditable of proceedings and with the most appalling of conduct, the Coroner refused to hear any of the family's evidence, being solely focussed on a restrictive medical cause of death.
In denying justice to the family of the deceased, the Coroner refused to call a jury to hear the relevant evidence in the case, and even said that the Human Rights Act did not apply to the proceedings. Indeed the Coroner refused to hear evidence against the hospital and mental health trust where Sandra died despite voluminous evidence showing institutional failings to protect her life.
On the first anniversary of Sandra's death, her family are issuing Judicial Review proceedings at the High Court to have Dr. Reid's proceedings quashed and a fresh inquest ordered. Mind, the mental health charity, have been supporting the family's calls for justice and the family's legal team believe that the case could be important in changing the way that deaths in mental hospitals are investigated in Britain.
Interested people are urged to visit the family's blog at
http://justice4sandra.blogspot.com and to sign up for email updates, or alternatively to email steven.allen@gmail.com.
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 6 comments
Very bad...
03.10.2007 21:23
Roxanne
The Right to Life?
04.10.2007 11:52
My partner died on 3 November 2005. He had been in the Princess Royal Hospital in Haywards Heath under Section 3 MHA.
He was given 24 hours home leave on that day and left the hospital at 13.00. Since they didn't give any notice of the home leave, I had to get some shopping for the evening meal. I left the house at 14.50 to go to the supermarket. At 15.25 a passer by saw him on fire in the garden. It appears he had poured petrol over himself and ignited it with a blow torch. He burned to death.
The previous day, during his ward round, the "doctor" in charge of his care had asked him if he had suicidal thoughts, reply, "yes". Had he ever attempted suicide, response, "yes". These answers were not pursued and he was allowed home the next day. The doctor said that he considered he was recovered and would be discharged within 3 weeks.
After his death, I found that the drug regime he was on was wholly inappropriate, drugs that were contra indicated given together. Drugs for short term use given long term etc. His health declined dramatically whilst he was in the hospital.
Then a senior consultant at the hospital told me that this doctor had a bad track record and "very many of his patients have died, other things have happened, it has all been covered up". I know of 6 others who have died as a result of this doctor's gross negligence subsequent to my partner.
There was an Inquest and I put a considerable amount of information before the Coroner. Despite the fact he was in the "care of the state" the Coroner sat without a jury. He ignored most of the findings put to him (it was the Surrey Coroner) and made false statements in the hearing. He never considered the facts surrounding his treatment and the doctor. I maintained there was a case for prosecuting the doctor for manslaughter by virtue of gross and reckless negligence. There was enough evidence for this. It never saw the light of day and the doctor continues to kill by mistreatment.
The NHS Trust refuses to cooperate with the NHS complaints procedure. Referrals to Healthcare Commission and Health Ombudsman mean entry into a world created by Kafka. It is grotesque. Meanwhile people continue to die and nothing is done. I can only think that it suits the powers that preside. An NHS cost cutting exercise? Killing patients saves money which is all that seems to matter these days.
My partner had an interest in eugenics which is ironic as that is what seems to be operating here. It is killing sanctioned by the state.
Linda
Need to campaign
04.10.2007 23:34
My husband was killed by administrated methadone - I would not be able to say if it was intentional or it was simple malpractice. He died in a psychiatric hospital. He was not an heroin addict, he was described by everybody who knew his habits as an 'occasional user', therefore he did not need methadone at all. He became an occasional user after the death of his mother because he couldn't cope with the pain of berevement. He took an overdose on purpose, but did not die of that, they killed him later in hospital by poisoning him with methadone when he was already weak. There is more to the story, but to keep things simple and to the point: his death was also covered up - natural causes- by the same St Pancras coroner, Stephen Chan, who declared the death of Henry Stanley was a 'tragic accident'... just to show what kind of 'justice' we can expect.
It appears it is standard practice to put everybody on methadone, even people who has only used once and therefore cannot be addicted. Notoriously, methadone is more addictive than heroin. Similarily, in some psychitric wards they are trying to put everybody on the injection... One person in 4 experience some sort of mental problems at some stage of their lives. Most recover spontaneusly, unless of course they are put on the injection...they will have to go back to the hospital for the rest of their lives. Such practices go to increase the profits of the pharmaceutical multinationals, who have a big hand in training doctors in some universities: but the system could also be used as a way to control and eventually eliminate some people who are 'undesirable'... People who are ill cannot contribute to the economy, that's why so many unexplained deaths, I think. Especially when people happen to have been put in cathegories that are stigmatised, as mental patients and drug addicts are, and therefore treated as if they were less than human.
The numbers I got from a friend who is a journalist: it is over 700 deaths in the last year in psychiatric custody alone, more than 100 died in police custody and more than 100 in prisons. The families of those who died in police custory have been fighting for years to get justice, never got it. Over 700 is far too many to be attributed to negligence alone. As for natural causes, it would be plausible to have so many deaths in cancer wards, not in psychiatric hospitals.
ver
Euthanasia by the State?
05.10.2007 13:25
The 7 people I know of who died in the "care" of the Princess Royal, Haywards Heath, all under one particular doctor and did not count in the statistics of people who died whilst under the care of the state. In every case, the coroners covered up the facts and the verdicts were a total travesty.
Also, this doctor has a policy of discharging people, telling them to, "go home and commit suicide". They are given huge amounts of medication at the same time.
Apart from those who die, there are many more who are mistreated. Again, this is a deliberate policy and appears to relate to cutting costs no matter what the effects on patients.
Any ideas to get public awareness of this policy?
Linda
The British Gulags?
06.10.2007 15:19
We are told that the Soviet practise was barbaric where people with anti government attitudes were incarcerated in homes and "rehabilitated". There appears to be little difference with what is happening here.
I know of someone who spoke out against the Freemasons and finished up in an institution, pumped full of drugs.
The state feels the need to protect itself by calling those who oppose it mentally ill. The whores of doctors who proceed to prostitute themselves to appease their masters should be struck off at the very least.
Fran
e-mail:
CIENFUEGOS@BLUEBOTTLE.COM
A Campaign About Deaths in Mental Health Custody
11.10.2007 14:43
But, more than this, the deaths are a human rights catastrophe and something needs to be changed. I'm all up for having some kind of organised campaign on this issue and would be keen to hear peoples' ideas. I'm working with Mind on my mother's case and they are extremely supportive - maybe they could help us get organised. What do people think?
Steven Allen
Steven Allen
e-mail:
steven.allen@gmail.com
Homepage:
http://justice4sandra.blogspot.com