EPUT: Neglect at mental health unit led to death of Elise
Neglect at a mental health unit contributed to the death of a "happy and outgoing" 16-year-old, an inquest jury has heard.Elise Sebastian, from Southminster near Maldon, Essex, was found unresponsive in her bedroom at the St Aubyn Centre in Colchester, in April 2021.The teenager was supposed to have been receiving one-to-one care but, the inquest heard, an infrared alert system - which warned staff if she had been in her bathroom for too long - was muted, and she had been left alone for 28 minutes.An inquest jury at Chelmsford Coroner's Court unanimously agreed that Elise's death could have been prevented if it were not for multiple failures in her care.
The St Aubyn Centre, described in the hearing as "chaotic", is run by the Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust (EPUT), currently the subject of an ongoing public inquiry.Pravin Fernando, representing EPUT, admitted that Elise's room should have been locked to prevent the teenager entering alone, adding: "The trust accepts that these failings were causative of her death."
The inquest heard Elise had secured a place at Writtle College to work with animals and her parents described her as a "happy, outgoing, funny little girl".She had been diagnosed with autism and her parents has become increasingly concerned about her anxiety and depression.On 4 March 2021, after she had self-harmed a number of times, she was admitted for the second time to a ward at the unit.
'Poor Wi-fi'
Essex area coroner Sonia Hayes heard how Elise had asked to go to the toilet, and although some doors may have been left open, others needed a staff swipe card to let her through.The ward had introduced an infrared monitoring system two months earlier as part of a trial, to reduce the risk of patients self-harming in isolated areas.Handheld monitoring tablets were not working because of poor Wi-fi, and the unit's clinical lead, Brian O'Donnell, did not think having someone allocated to monitoring the alerts on the main computer would be a "good use of their time".
During the inquest, expert witness Prof Jasmeet Soar said that when Elise was found, she had been in cardiac arrest for nine minutes.He said there had been a four to five minute delay in staff using an oxygen mask, and a defibrillator took seven minutes for staff to use, instead of the three minute maximum mentioned in guidelines."Someone should have got the defibrillator and started it earlier," he added.Prof Soar said the defibrillator also did not appear to have been used properly, from the readings he obtained, and had been switched on and off.He said: "Some of the delays could have been avoided if staff would have known how to use the equipment."
The inquest also heard how the majority of staff in the unit were bank and agency workers who would not have known the children well.Ms Hayes said she heard the ward "was clearly short staffed" and described how medical records appeared to be incomplete at times.Mr O'Donnell said he had "constantly" raised concerns about staffing numbers with senior management, adding: "Our budget would always be overspent - my argument was that we were underfunded."The inquest heard how observations should have a therapeutic interaction but some thought that was impossible to achieve.Consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist Dr Malcolm Bourne also told the hearing that "staff needed support to deal with children who were challenging and that autism could make depression more difficult to treat".
Shortly after Elise's death, the ward at the St Aubyn Centre was closed to new admissions by the Care Quality Commission.The CQC report found understaffing was a "significant concern" made worse by managers not ensuring staff had the appropriate skills and experience to look after vulnerable patients.
'Deepest condolences'
The jury foreman told the inquest there were two main factors that may have caused the teenager's death.The first was "poorly administered observations due to poor staffing levels and falsified information on observation forms".He said the second was "Elise being able to gain access into her room and her observation level in an isolated area not being considered", which the jury believed had directly led to Elise's death.
The coroner said she would write a prevention of future death report (PFDR) which would recommend changes to make sure failures were not repeated.Paul Scott, chief executive of EPUT, said: "I want to say sorry to Elise's family and to everyone who loved her that she did not receive the care she deserved, and I offer my deepest condolences."
Follow Essex news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
34 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain's dysfunctional finances are stifling aspiration and opportunity
SIR – As the Chancellor prepares for her Spending Review tomorrow, it is striking that no political party appears willing to confront the scale of Britain's fiscal problems. Now retired, I reflect on a life in which my generation enjoyed real opportunity. I left school at 16, completed an apprenticeship, studied further, bought a modest home, and raised a family. We lived carefully, but the path to security was there. Today's younger generation faces soaring taxes, student debt (we had grants), unaffordable housing, and strained public services – all while the state borrows heavily and spends over £100 billion a year on debt interest. Despite record tax receipts, driven by stealthy fiscal drag, the public gets little in return. When David Cameron's government attempted to rein in the deficit, this was attacked as 'austerity'. Yet no one now dares say what must be said: we must gradually pay down the national debt if we are to free up resources for housing, education and the NHS. The Government should focus not on how much it spends, but on what it delivers. A country that keeps dodging difficult choices will end up with no choices at all. Paul Allen Fleet, Hampshire SIR – As we await Rachel Reeves's Spending Review, we can only hope that the Government will cut up the national credit card, rather than grant itself a higher limit. But such an outcome would be controversial, not least because state-run institutions are bureaucratic and financially insatiable. We have reached the point where a major spending review should go far beyond manipulation of spreadsheets. It is time for serious questions as to what government does and why, and how it goes about it. However, these questions are too challenging for mere bean-counters. Are there any thinkers and innovators out there, or have they already left the country? David Porter Plymouth, Devon SIR – Britain is the sixth largest economy in the world, but it really doesn't feel like it. The country is seriously in debt and high interest rates mean that the cost of servicing that debt has also risen. This is being compounded by an ever-increasing welfare bill, an immediate demand to boost our spending on defence and a frankly unachievable net zero policy. The only plausible way out of this situation is to encourage economic growth, improve productivity and reduce uncompetitive energy costs. Yet this Government appears to have no solution except to tax and spend. The country is going broke fast, and at some point – perhaps even within this parliament – the IMF or the markets will call time on the situation.
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
UK has one of ‘worst statutory leave offers for fathers in developed world'
The UK has one of the 'worst statutory leave offers for fathers and other parents in the developed world', the chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee has warned. In a new report, the House of Commons committee said a maximum of two weeks' paternity leave is 'completely out of step with how most couples want to share their parenting responsibilities' and 'entrenches outdated gender stereotypes about caring'. The committee has urged the Government to either amend the Employment Rights Bill to legislate for a day one right to paid leave or commit to 'considering this vital change within its review' in consultation with employers. It has also called on the Government to consider raising paternity pay to the level of maternity pay in the first six weeks – 90% of average earnings. The paternity and shared parental leave report by the committee said working parents 'will be let down by a review that leads only to tinkering around the edges of the system'. Chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee Sarah Owen said the UK's parental leave system was in 'urgent need of an overhaul to fit with the reality of working parents' lives'. The Labour MP for Luton North said reform 'must start with longer and better paid paternity leave'. Ms Owen said: 'It's essential the Government's proposed review addresses the system's fundamental failings, including low statutory pay, inadequate leave periods for fathers and others, exclusion of many working parents and guardians, plus design flaws and unnecessary complexity in the Shared Parental Leave scheme. 'The UK's parental leave system has fallen far behind most comparable countries, and we now have one of the worst statutory leave offers for fathers and other parents in the developed world.' The Labour MP added: 'Ministers must commit to meaningful reforms in the medium-term, with a view to going further towards a more gender equal parental leave system. 'Tinkering around the edges of a broken system will let down working parents. While much-needed substantial change to our paid parental leave system will require considerable financial investment, this would be outweighed by wider societal and economic benefits.' The report states that the UK's rate of statutory parental pay is 'completely out of kilter with the cost of living, has not kept pace with inflation and is far below rates in most comparable countries'. It recommends phased introduction of increases to statutory pay across the system to bring rates for all working parents up to 80% or more of average earnings or the real Living Wage. The lack of provision for self-employed fathers is 'deeply unfair', the report adds. The committee recommends that the Government consider options for providing statutory paid leave for all self-employed working fathers as part of its review of the parental leave system, including introducing a paternity allowance for self-employed fathers and other parents, similar to maternity allowance. The report states that the shared parental leave system is 'extremely difficult for most parents and their employers to understand'. It said a forthcoming review must examine the function and necessity of eligibility rules, with a view to 'simplifying or removing the employment status, time in service and earnings criteria'. The committee said the review should examine approaches taken in overseas systems, including the German 'partnership bonus' and Portugal's 'sharing bonus', which provide additional paid leave to couples in which both parents take a substantial portion of leave while the other returns to paid work.
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
Family visa income threshold should not rise to skilled worker level
The Government has been warned against raising the minimum income threshold for family visas to the same level for skilled workers as it is most likely to conflict with human rights law, an advisory body has said. Skilled workers are only eligible to come to the UK if they earn a salary of £38,700 or more, compared to £29,000 required mainly for British citizens or settled residents to bring their partner to the country under family visas. The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) set out its recommendations after a review requested by the Home Secretary to look at how to set a minimum income requirement (MIR) for family visas that balances economic wellbeing and family life. The previous government planned to introduce the higher threshold for family visa applicants to be equivalent to the skilled worker level. But the committee's report said: 'Given the family route that we are reviewing has a completely different objective and purpose to the work route, we do not understand the rationale for the threshold being set using this method. 'We do not recommend the approach based on the skilled worker salary threshold as it is unrelated to the family route and is the most likely to conflict with international law and obligations (e.g. Article 8).' Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is the right to private and family life that can be applied to migration cases in the UK. The UK's current £29,000 threshold is high compared to other high-income countries reviewed by the MAC. The analysis found a high proportion of applicants for partner visas are women and 90% are under the age of 44. Pakistan is the largest nationality to use the route applying from outside the country. The committee's analysis gave some options that a threshold of £24,000 to £28,000 could give more priority to economic wellbeing, such as reducing the burden to taxpayers, than on family life. It also suggested a criteria of £23,000 to £25,000 to ensure families can support themselves but not necessarily require them to earn a salary above minimum wage. Chairman of MAC, Professor Brian Bell, said: 'While the decision on where to set the threshold is ultimately a political one, we have provided evidence on the impacts of financial requirements on families and economic wellbeing, and highlight the key considerations the government should take into account in reaching its decision.' While the committee said it is not possible to predict how different threshold changes would impact net migration, it said lowering the amount to £24,000, for example, could mean an increase of around one to three percent of projected future net migration. The report added: 'Determining the MIR threshold involves striking a balance between economic wellbeing and family life. 'Whilst a lower threshold would favour family life and entail a higher net fiscal cost to the taxpayer, a higher threshold (below a certain level) would favour economic wellbeing. 'But a higher number of families would experience negative impacts relating to financial pressures, prolonged separation, relationships, adults' mental health and children's mental health and education.' The committee advised against raising the threshold for families with children as despite them facing higher living costs, the impacts on family life appear 'particularly significant' for children. It also recommended keeping the income amount required the same across all regions of the UK. The MAC also said their review was 'greatly hindered' by insufficient data and urged for better data collection by the Home Office on characteristics of each applicant to be linked to outcomes to inform further policy decisions. Reacting to the recommendations, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the report shows that raising the salary threshold will drive migration numbers down and urged for the threshold to be increased to £38,000. 'Migration figures remain far too high. It's time to end ECHR obstruction, raise the salary thresholds, and take back control of who comes into this country,' he said. 'As Kemi and I said on Friday, if the ECHR stops us from setting our own visa rules, from deporting foreign criminals or from putting Britain's interests first, then we should leave the ECHR.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'The Home Secretary commissioned the independent Migration Advisory Committee to undertake a review. 'We are now considering its findings and will respond in due course. More broadly, the government has already committed to legislate to clarify the application of Article 8 of the ECHR for applicants, caseworkers and the courts.'
