MRI SCANS – CAN A NEUROLOGIST PLEASE CONFIRM PLUS CARE QUALITY COMMISSION COMPLAINT
Since moving to Lincolnshire Partnership Trust Elizabeth’s physical health has not been taken seriously by any of 10 doctors apart from Dr Memons from Cygnet Durham who has not had the usual arrogant dismissive response towards me as a mother.
I am not alone in desperately trying to get to the bottom of the truth when it is difficult to have faith in the medical profession who have gone to lengths to cover up underlying causes and Elizabeth is suffering life threatening “episodes” where her BP is sky high and her blood oxygen levels very low.
When you have scans done privately it is very disturbing when professionals such as Radiologists and psychiatrists pass these off as being “normal”. I now want everyone to know that just because they say “normal” does not mean normal at all. I am bitterly disappointed and feel let down that some doctors do not look into things properly. There have been ten doctors and five institutions under Lincolnshire Partnership Trust in a period of two years.
It is only now after countless “episodes” lasting hours on end have they referred Elizabeth to a Consultant Neurologist, a specialist in his field and thank God this is with another Trust though under Lincolnshire.
When scans from Barnet Enfield and Haringey MH Trust come back as “abnormal findings on a scan” as a mother and carer I have gone out of my way to ask what that has meant. It does say in the files that going way back to around 2008 “Anterior Region Medial Temporal Compromise“. I contacted Headway about this. The former MH nurse of Headway said “well done Ms Bevis“. This is not a mental illness.
The reason I am posting this for all my readers to hear is because I am concerned that there may be other people under the MH all over the County who are being denied proper pathological tests when they may have underlying physical health problems or injury that is being completely ignored and I do not think this is right at all. With Martha’s Rule coming up this gives hope to people like myself but it is a completely nightmare getting a second opinion on a medical condition when you are misfortunate to have a relative under the MH stuck on a never-ending section but why should such people be deprived of the correct diagnosis and treatment? It surely is imperative they get the right treatment for the underlying correct physical health diagnosis as all schizophrenia is, is a catch all label and physical health conditions or injuries are not pathologically investigated leading to incorrect diagnosis and treatment for many years on end.
I have had to pay privately for the scans when given a small amount of leave whilst under Ash Villa but they have revealed a great deal.
I am prepared also to pay for a private neurologist report and by posting this publicly I am hoping that someone can help me urgently in case Elizabeth gets moved on the spur of the moment as has been done before.
Whilst finally after all this length of time Lincolnshire Partnership Trust have referred Elizabeth to a Consultant Neurologist her appointment is not until 3rd January 2024. Now all of a sudden Lincolnshire Partnership Trust are talking of moving Elizabeth far away from her family to East Yorkshire. She does not want to go however I am worried that the Neurologist appointment with Lincolnshire United Hospitals Trust will be cancelled and then once trapped in another prison like setting (talk is of yet another hospital) or even a care home so when will there be the opportunity for Elizabeth to see the Consultant Neurologist. I have every faith in the Consultant Neurologist who is called Dr C Solinas but because everything has been covered up by two Trusts which include BEHMHT it is very hard to have faith in the majority of all the doctors involved under the MH who have flatly refused a scan as being unnecessary and here below is a prime example of a doctor who has done research into the Limbic system that everyone should be aware of.
Do you agree that ‘upregulation’ and ‘downregulation’ of dopamine might affect presentation of psychotic symptoms?”
If there are abnormal readings on a scan they have an absolute duty of care to investigate them and a psychiatrist is not qualified to do that. If there is a lesion it needs treating as such. Psycopharmaceutical interventions are not suitable to do that.
If that abnormal reading is in the pre-frontal cortex it could account for some of her behaviour and non-responsiveness to drugs. I am working on a paper at this very moment on psychophysiological causes of anxiety and depression.
She needs that scan and a proper investigation of anything found, not just references to ‘abnormalities’
IMG-0003-00001jpeg. (their reference Im: 7/24) shows the curious straight line going from the right temple radiating backwards at about 60 degrees to the lateral line of the skull. On the opposite side you will see a dark area corresponding to just behind the left ear.
On IMG-0004-00001jpeg. (their reference Im: 11/24) there is another curious dark line behind the right eye. You need to ask what they think these images are showing. Are they potential lesions?
On IMG-0005-00001jpeg. (their reference Im: 26/96) the scan refers to >55 years old trauma. What are they referring to here?
These images should be visible on your computer software without the Dicom download since jpeg. is a standard picture file format”
From: MHA Enquiries <MHAEnquiries@cqc.org.uk>
Sent: 16 November 2023 11:25
To: susanb255@outlook.com <susanb255@outlook.com>
Subject: CQC MHA Complaint Ref: ENQ1-17716124293
Dear Ms Bevis
We are writing to you from the Mental Health Act complaints team at the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
We have now received a copy of the letter summarising the outcome of the investigation into your complaints. We believe that a copy of this letter dated 14 November 2023 and signed by Dr Toby Greenall the Consultant Psychiatrist at Peter Hodgkinson Centre has already been sent to you, but please let us know if this is not so.
The Mental Health Act grants the CQC a discretionary power to investigate complaints where they are about the use of the powers and duties in the Act. If you are not satisfied with the response provided to you by the service, you could request that the CQC consider reviewing your unresolved concerns.
We do sometimes receive complaints about matters that we are not able to investigate because they are not within these powers. The CQC complaints process cannot make any recommendation about matters that can only be decided by a court of law. For example, we cannot rule on whether a detention is lawful, nor would we be able to provide any clinical opinion re diagnosis.
Before we could decide if there is a role for us, we would need a clear statement from you outlining what you are unhappy with in the provider response, any outstanding issues and your desired outcome.
Alternatively, you can contact the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman Office (PHSO) within the next twelve months, saying why you are not satisfied. Their address is: –
The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman for England
Citygate
Mosley Street
Manchester
M2 3HQ
www.ombudsman.org.uk/making-complaint
Telephone: 0345 015 4033
The PHSO can consider whether to investigate complaints that the NHS (and NHS funded care) in England have failed to act properly or fairly or provided a poor service. If the Ombudsman feels that it is more appropriate for the CQC to consider the outstanding concerns, they may refer you to our organisation.
The PHSO is the final arbiter in any complaint matter and therefore the CQC cannot consider any request for investigation once the Ombudsman has either completed or declined an investigation into your complaints.
Could I please request that you use the above reference number on any correspondence in relation to this case. If we do not hear from you within 15 working days of the date of this letter, we will assume that you have received satisfactory answers to the issues you have raised through Local Resolution and your enquiry will be closed.
Yours sincerely
Mark
Mental Health Act Complaints Team
LPFT have also treated my daughter like a restricted prisoner under Dols and tried to sever contact by taking the phone away whilst at Ash Villa and right now on Castle Ward Elizabeth is subject to restricted visiting, no leave after 2 years – treated like a prisoner with no rights as though on dols to this day. Even in former shocking area of Enfield she was not treated like a restricted prisoner.
The doctors responsible for that non-compliant capacity examination also need asking why they did not consider the criteria form the MCA 2005. Elizabeth is perfectly capable of making a decision as to who represents her in any litigation. They have not come anywhere near the required standard of proof that she lacks capacity to the extent that she is incapable of determining who she wants as next friend.
I was told by dr Shahpasandy he is getting rid of me as nearest relative and that the POA investigation is an entirely separate matter. The bullying started the minute we moved. The first “best interest assessor” was Margaret Biddles followed by Andrew Morrans AMHP under the shocking department run by Heidi Merrikin – Manager.
As NR and with Elizabeth’s written consent you are entitled view the capacity report which must give full reasons for the decision on capacity. I am sure I have requested these before but in case my correspondence has been lost I will certainly re-request these and I will post right here what response I get.
The doctors responsible for that non-compliant capacity examination also need asking why they did not consider the criteria form the MCA 2005. Elizabeth is perfectly capable of making a decision as to who represents her in any litigation. They have not come anywhere near the required standard of proof that she lacks capacity to the extent that she is incapable of determining who she wants as next friend. Too right! If Elizabeth is capable of contacting a solicitor herself and contacting a firm who do capacity assessments to request a fresh one done this rubbishes all the capacity assessments currently being used as an excuse to take away her autonomy and decide upon everything this team below see as “Best Interest which is a total disgrace in my opinion.
I am now training to be a Best Interest Assessor and so therefore can comment on what is right and wrong and all of these below apart from myself have got things very wrong. I have sought expert opinions and Elizabeth has contacted a firm of capacity assessors herself only recently so the team below should welcome the capacity assessors that are completely independent and appointed by Elizabeth onto the ward and I will let you know their response. I had no influence in this as Elizabeth chose to ring them herself so how comes I am being labelled as a bad influence when Elizabeth has a mind of her own. I am looking forward to hearing this explanation but I suspect just like the CCTV footage I am also waiting for nothing will appear in terms of explanation or evidence.
CASTLE WARD
To: KHOKHAR, Waqqas (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); TANIMOWO, Adekiite (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); KHOKHAR, Waqqas (LEICESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS TRUST); CALDERONCARHUARICRA, Katteryne (BARNET, ENFIELD AND HARINGEY MENTAL HEALTH NHS TRUST); BARFORD-COWLEY, Amelia (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST) Cc: AITKENHEAD, Angela (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Barker, Robert (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Barlow, Diane (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); BELLAMY, Charlotte (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); CAMSELL, Lucy (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); FISHER, Bridgette (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Fitzpatrick, Brenda (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); FLETCHER, Sue (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); GOSTELOW, Joby (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); JAQUES, Anthony (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Keogh, Sophie (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); LAKE, James (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); MARABADA, Ngonidzashe (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); MOONS, Kashmir (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); POPOOLA, Tomilayo (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); SCOTT, Emily (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); SENDALL, Jackie (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Skelton, Alice (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); SUNDAR, Siddharth (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Tarling, Paul (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Waby, Lucieann (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); WALLACE, Sarah (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); White, Jocelyne (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST); Woodlock, Emma (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST);
CQC COMPLAINT IS ABOUT 2-1 VISITING RESTRICTIONS BASED UPON ME BEING A BAD INFLUENCE TO ELIZABETH WHEN ALL ALONG SHE HAS FULL CAPACITY TO DECIDE THINGS FOR HERSELF AND ALSO THE CORRUPT MANNER IN WHICH THE MCA AND MHA HAVE BEEN USURPED TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THE INSTITUTION AND PROFESSIONALS INSTEAD OF A VULNERABLE PATIENT’S WISHES.
First of all Elizabeth wishes everyone to know how she feels and what she wants:
Friday 10 November 2023 witnessed by friend:
“I want to eventually come home to live with my Mum in the annex through the CoP.
I miss my Mum greatly and want to go home to her”
Elizabeth has her own little bungalow and there is no intention on my part to stop professionals visiting.
Care Coordinator from BEHMHTNHS Hannah Kajue commented “I do not think the annex is suitable” well for a start she has not even seen it and has NO SAY because all they will be doing is paying for S117 aftercare which they previously failed to prompting us to move. They have also failed consistently to provide anything fit for purpose which again I can well and truly prove. So it is all of the above but most of all Dr Khokhar who has the final word but tries to make out it is an MDT decision which is why I do not agree with MDTs because they allow certain professionals to hide and make out it is not them.
A CTR was promised by Martin Fahy – Director of Nursing ICB with independent Chair like in Enfield where the Independent Chair said “the whole thing stinks”.
Director of Nursing Sharon Harvey from LPFT promised a fresh capacity assessment independent of LPFT but Elizabeth’s wishes should be taken into consideration and Elizabeth has chosen a firm to carry out this. It is only fair that LPFT should pay for it as nothing has been done correctly by two doctors and 1 AMHP. NO CAPACITY ASSESSMENTS SHOULD EVER BE CARRIED OUT IN-HOUSE AND AS LPFT HAVE MADE A HUGE MISTAKE BY APPOINTING IN-HOUSE ASSESSORS THIS NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED.
I would also like the CQC to be invited to this multi-agency panel and the wonderful Access Charity who have previously given wonderful support until Elizabeth’s phone was taken away and to be fair to them made matters impossible for them to stay in contact however I have contacted them again today to let them know about the CTR.
The second diagnosis on the care plan is “Autism” but Dr Khokhar keeps saying “you have got schizophrenia, you have got schizophrenia” – this is extremely wrong and I want to clear up any confusion which is why I have turned to X to obtain expert opinions on the scan and Elizabeth has already given written consent for the scans to be shared with the wonderful Cavernoma Alliance and other experts.
It is extremely wearing to have to fight for another expert opinion and very quickly now I am so alarmed by LPFT wishing to send Elizabeth away to a 6th institution far away in East Yorkshire which could occur any time now that I therefore have had no option but to see if I can get as many opinions by Neurologists or even Neuro surgeons as possible and that is not because I do not trust Dr C Solinas but because I am afraid of the team’s next move and that Elizabeth could be whisked away so quickly that she misses out on any second opinions when it has already been highlighted the very valid concerns.
The CQC should look at how LPFT have behaved in the past also at former hospital Ash Villa:
From: Blake, Zoe LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST)
Sent: 24 May 2022 10:12
To: susan bevis
Subject: RE: Managers hearing
Good morning Susan
I hope your well.
As advised on many occasions I am your single point of access, others will not reply but I will seek to gain the relevant answers and feed them back to you.
You will not be sent the link to the managers meeting today, Elizabeth has not given verbal consent to any member of staff although we have tried to gain this on many occasions.
Elizabeth has not been deemed to have Capacity to consent to your request on this occasion. Oh yes she has as I have her text messages inviting me to prove and knew exactly what time it took place. Ash Villa were well aware of this too as I phoned on the day asking for the link.
Kind regards
Zoe Blake
Carer Champion
Ash Villa
Sleaford
NG34 8QA
Subject: Managers hearing
As NR and with Elizabeth’s written consent you are entitled view the capacity report which must give full reasons for the decision on capacity.
Zoe Blake
Carer Champion
Ash Villa
Sleaford
NG34 8QA
From: susan bevis
Sent: 24 May 2022 09:39
To: Blake, Zoe (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST)
Cc: MHA (LINCOLNSHIRE PARTNERSHIP NHS FOUNDATION TRUST) <lpft.mha@nhs.net>
Subject: Managers hearing
Please can you give me a reason why Sophie Jackson and Sarah Twist of the MHA office have continually ignored me as nearest relative and today is the managers hearing which Elizabeth has invited me to. So where is the link for this? I have asked for a managers hearing many times only to be ignored by the MHA office. What on earth is going on under that office as nearest relative I am surely entitled to call a managers hearing.
I look forward to receiving the link
Regards
Susan Bevis.
So with the above examples you can see that I was cut out completely at the time of Dr Shahpasandy being RC.
Elizabeth’s medication was raised to enormous levels from just 300mg per fortnight to circa 400mg weekly with 10mg on top:
“I can make no sense of that. A depot and pro re nata medication by tablet.
The drugs raised from 300mg per fortnight to 400mg weekly of clopixol PLUS 10mg clopixol tablet prn”
“After 24 months it should obvious that she is treatment refractive vis-a-vis Clopixol. They do not appear to have taken any notice of the fact that she is a poor metaboliser and that she may have inflammatory and endocrine disorders causing the drugs to be poorly or not metabolised.”
Elizabeth was judged to lack capacity however the common law test as determined in Masterman-Lister v Brutton & Co [2003] 1WLR 1511 was not applied.
Interrogative Suggestibility. Gudjonnson (1984)
1. Baldwin (1993); Moston (1995), Pearse and Gudjonsson (1996), Shepherd (1993)
“whether the party to the legal proceedings is capable of understanding, with the assistance of proper explanation from legal advisers and experts in other disciplines as the case may require, the issues on which his consent or decision is likely to be necessary in the course of those proceedings… the threshold for capacity to provide instructions is not high, and people severely affected by a mental disorder may still be able to provide instructions if you explain matters simply and clearly.”
A proper examination applying the proper methods and following the Code of Practice correctly, instead of manipulating it would show that Elizabeth has capacity, albeit impaired. That is why they want to get you as far away from the treatment regimen as possible.
“Either you don’t understand the question, in which case you say so, and your “micro-expressions” confirm it, or you do, and you’re dodging. The latter is rather too clever for no capacity”.
So getting back to my complaint re CQC a thorough investigation needs to be carried out to look into breaches of code of conduct and policy to achieve results stated as being “best interest” – how on earth can it be best interest to send a vulnerable person far away from home and family making out she has no capacity. THIS IS TOTAL ABUSE OF POWER AND PROCESS AND COULD WELL AFFECT OTHERS. IN FACT BEFORE THE CQC SAYS THEY CANNOT INVESTIGATE INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINTS I KNOW OF OTHERS AFFECTED.
This is undoubtedly a matter for The Rt Hon Victoria Atkins to look into as it concerns Lincolnshire but also a much wider picture that affects the entire UK because there are many other parents fighting right now that I know of.
I am also aware of others whose relatives have been sent far away and there must be some sort of deal with Yorkshire?
A while back in Enfield I asked for Elizabeth to be considered for The Retreat in York or Amitola Community that offer an entirely different approach. However I moved to benefit Elizabeth to the right environment and do not see why she should be moved at all since there is a wonderful organisation called Shared Lives whose offices are in Sleaford. I have also seen an example of a parent asking the LA in Surrey I believe to provide the land where disable people can have their own community and parents can be involved unlike at Lincolnshire Partnership Trust. I would be happy to be involved with any project of this nature and know of others seeking similar solutions. Imagine what it must be like to be 90 and fighting to be near to your relative – a son who is in a wheelchair stuck on a MH ward – this is so sad and I know of other cases in this area too who could be actively involved alongside care workers and professionals working together and not having to challenge decisions of a MDT involving about 30 strangers and deciding on which institution next all of which are the wrong environment. But in this new area there is a wealth of land and farming communities where the correct provision can be made and money saved by this.
I also think that if there was Open Dialogue there would be no complaints from parents and carers such as myself who are on the receiving end of heartbreaking messages and phone calls from their relatives who would not be fighting if they were included rather than excluded in decision making.
I hope that the Rt Hon Victoria Atkins takes this on board as I am in touch with the most shocking cases throughout the UK and would like to see something done about it
Psychiatric Abuse UK 