Accessible rooms on wards for female patients with disability

Matthew Syed made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Yn disgwyl am adolygiad mewnol gan Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust o'u triniaeth o'r cais hwn.

Dear Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust,

Please assist me with the following request regarding disability and gender . This request applies to wards at the Huntley Centre and Highgate Centre only.

(1) Please give the number of male only wards, female only wards and mixed wards across the Trust.

(2) Please give the number of self contained rooms or confirm if all wards have self contained rooms

(3) Please give the number of fully accessible self contained rooms across the Trust and where these are located ie in mixed wards/ single gender wards

(4) Please confirm if the accessible rooms on mixed wards are on the male side of the ward or the female side of the ward or both

(5) Please give the total number of female only accessible self contained rooms across the Trust

(6)Please give details and provide policy documents or guidance on placing female patients with physical disability in to accessible rooms on the male side of a ward.

(7) Re Q7. Please give details of how many times this has occurred in the periods 2010 to present

(8) Please confrim if on all mixed wards male and female sides are physically separated by a door and whether this door is routinely locked to ensure separation.

(9) Please give details of how many ward based Occupational Therapists are currently in post within the Trust and where they are located

Yours faithfully,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,

Please find attached, an acknowledgement of your request for information.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Freedom of Information Officer | Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3115 | F: 020 3317 2730 |
E: [email address]

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,

Please see attached, the outcome of your request for information.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer (Freedom of Information) |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 3rd Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Freedom of Information Team

Thank you for the detailed response which is very helpful.

There appears to be some confusion around the term 'accessible'. I mean it within the context of physical disability . However the respondent appears to interpret this as rooms being accessible to ward staff.

So I have 3 outstanding queries:

(1) Please can the respondent review the reply to see if the details would be altered in the context of disability access.

(2) It appears that within the Trust that there is only 1 fully accessible room designated for women with physical disability and that this is within Rosewood Unit at St Pancras.

You describe the layout of mixed wards across the Trust ( some of which I am familiar with). This appears to confirm that on the wards the genders are separated with doors controlled by staff and are within DH guidelines. You also confirm that it is not Trust policy to place female patients within male sides areas of the ward

However there is not one room within the separated female side outside of Rosewood Unit that is accessible for female patients with physical disability. The only disabled accessible rooms appear to be either within the male side of the ward of at least outside the female protected area albeit next to the nurses station.

Please confirm if this is accurate.

(3) Trust Bed Management policy is to admit acutely ill patients to Sapphire Ward at Highgate Centre for up to 14 days for assessment. This is a mixed ward and does not have an accessible adapted room on the female protected side. The ward staff and manager have previously confirmed this.

Therefore how does the Trust provide for the needs of women with physical disability if there are no accessible adapted rooms within the female protected area ? Please explain how the Trust considers that this is compliant with disability legislation.

Please also give information of the alternative options available for women in acute mental distress needing hospitalisation ( do not include Crisis houses in this response) who have physical disability and need adapted accommodation and possibly have additional care needs.

How often in the past 3 years has the Trust accessed private sector hospital beds in order to provide for physical disability needs? If Trust policy is to not access private beds and not to place women in male sides of wards then how is this group protected?

Please comment on how safe it is considered for women with physical disability to be placed in rooms that are not within the female only protected area and indeed may be located within the male area of a ward in some circumstances

Finally is there an Equalities Group within the Trust and if so can they please comment on this situation

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,

Please see attached, an acknowledgement of your request for an internal review.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer (Freedom of Information) |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 3rd Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd Helen Schulter anodiad ()

This Trust has just failed the most recent CQC inspection in October 2012 and has been ordered to provide details of compliance by November 13th 2013.
The report can be accessed on the CQC website under St Pancras Hospital. It ststes concerns that many of us have been raising for a very long time

http://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/file...

Gadawodd Helen Schulter anodiad ()

Typo - failed inspection October 2013

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

Dear Mr Syed,

I am sorry for the delay in responding to your request. This is because it has taken longer than expected. The trust do endeavour to respond to your request, within the next couple of days.

Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer (Freedom of Information) |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 3rd Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Information Governance Team

It is now 44 days since I requested an internal review to clarify points raised in the Trust's response.

The only reply I have had is an apology for the delay in providing the information requested.

It is a very simple request and the information is easily accessible. Therefore there appears to be other reasons why the Trust is withholding this information .

Given the very serious issue this request addresses and current concerns about safeguarding I am putting the Trust on notice that if a full response is not received within 6 working days then the matter will be referred to the ICO.

That will have given you 51 days to respond to the request for internal review and will have been 70+ days from the date of the original request.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

Dear Mr Syed,

Thank you for your patients.

Please be advised that, the trusts response to your request for an internal review, is almost complete. However, due to the season break and staff availability, the Trust have been unable to complete our response, as expected. The Trust do however, endeavour to complete our response to your internal review shortly.

Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer (Freedom of Information) |Information Governance Team Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 3rd Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

Dear Mr Syed,

Thank you for your patience.

Your response is currently with exec being approved. I anticipate that it should be ready for you by the end of today.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 1st Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear C&I

Is the problem here that you realise that by not providing accessible accommodation for women in an Acute Assessment unit that you are in breach of the law?

You are well aware that this issue is very closely linked with a very serious safeguarding case where C&I are now being investigated.

Presume this is why you have refused to respond. Very very simple request UNLESS you are trying to cover up something. Particularly a the Trust failed the most recent CQC inspection.

Not providing full disability access and therefore placing women with physical disability at risk is in itself a safeguarding breach

You are aware of this yet continue the practice

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Syed,

Please see attached, the outcome of your request for information.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 3317 2730 | E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 1st Floor, West Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust's handling of my FOI request 'Accessible rooms on wards for female patients with disability'.

(1) It is of significant concern that the Trust fails to meet the needs of female patients with physical and sensory disability in need of acute admission to hospital. While you refer to use of private sector beds the Trust has not given any figures for this.So please provide figures for how many times in the last 3 financial years that beds were purchased within the private sector to accommodate women with physical and/or sensory disability.

(2) Re response point 6.
That the Trust would under ANY circumstance consider use of enhanced observations solely because there was an increased risk due to non provision of accessible accommodation is both of considerable interest and concern.

To allow you to revisit this statement and in light of the somewhat confused response to use of private sector beds in these instances please explain in detail why the Trust would EVER consider this as an option INSTEAD of using one of the private sector beds you state you can access

(3) With reference to point (2) above and with reference to the Mental Health Code of Practice please explain the justification for placing someone on enhanced observations simply by virtue of disability.

The Mental Health Act Code of Practice is categorical that enhanced observation is to be used solely for the assessment and management of disturbed
behaviour.

At para 15.8 it states that interventions such as observation must never be used as
punishment or in a punitive manner.

At para 15.9 it states that intervention must be used in a way that causes the minimum interference to their privacy and dignity.

At para 15.41 it states that staff must balance the potentially distressing effects on the patient of increased levels of observation

Does the Trust not accept that using enhanced observations in the manner described in your response breaches the Code of Practice?

(4) Please confirm that the responses to the FOI request were legally informed.All matrons/ward managers/hospital adminisitators/ MHA Mangers are required to understand both law and the guidance in the COP. The presumption is that the Trust considers that the actions it has described are legally compliant. Please confirm that this is the case or amend the response accordingly.

(5)Does the Trust consider that in the situation described a physically disabled woman with capacity detained under the MHA and subject to enhanced observation equates to a Deprivation of Liberty requiring authorisation?

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a...

Yours faithfully,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,

Thank you for your email.

I apologise for sending you a delayed acknowledgement.

Please find attached, an acknowledgement of your request for information.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 7561 4305 |
E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 1st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd christina moriarty anodiad ()

This has taken this Trust 6 MONTHS so far to get a basic response together let alone a full one.
Let's hope the request for a further internal review ( or is it a new request) doesnt take as long.

Maybe the CQC should be informed of the failings to protect women who have physical and sensory disability?

Dear Freedom of Information Team

Please clarify if you are dealing with this as an internal review or as a further and separate request under the FOI.

This has take over 5 months for the Trust to respond. It is very straightforward UNLESS you are not compliant with PSED.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,

Please see attached, the outcome of your request for an internal review.

Kind regards
Wayne Elliott | Information Governance Officer |Information Governance Team
Camden & Islington NHS Foundation Trust | P: 020 3317 3114 | F: 020 7561 4305 |
E: [email address]

Information Governance Department, 1st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital, 4 St Pancras Way, London, NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Acosia Nyanin

Thank you for your response which took several months. It is noted that the delay in responding coincided with the recent CQC inspection.

Please deal with this as a new FOI request as the Trust's response has raised serious additional concerns regarding it's legal position.

The level of understanding of disability issues and legal responsibilities appears to be woeful. When asked who the Trust seeks guidance from with regard to disability issues the only references are to bodies dealing with physical medical needs.There is not a single reference to disability organisations. There is no reference to consulting the EHRC or use of their technical guidance.

In addition as the Trust is aware the references to crisis houses are irrelevant when referring to patients admitted under the MHA as they do not admit under these circumstances .

The imposition of 'safeguards' including close observations to protect the patient from others are both discriminatory and in conflict with the MHA Code of Practice and do not appear to be legally justifiable .

It is strongly suggested that the Trust seeks further legal clarification as twice now on public sites it has shown ignorance of the requirements of the above Act and an apparent refusal to consider disability needs as on an equal footing to MHA legislation. You are reminded that the MHA can only be enacted in the context of other legislation.

Further delay outside time limits or refusal to respond to the very specific points raised will be seen as an acknowledgement that C&I Foundation Trust are not compliant with s149 of the Equality Act.

Please deal with the following points and provide the following additional information :

(1) Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 outlines the Specific Duties the Trust has to comply with.This deals with reasonable adjustments as part of the Public Sector Equality Duty. However, the Trust's responses have not once referred to this duty despite it being central to this issue. There are multiple references to the DDA and buildings as if this is the limitation of your duty towards patients with physical or sensory disability.

The response also states 'The Trust through its Estates & Facilities Department has commissioned and received a disability access survey in respect of its main site at St Pancras Hospital'.

(a) With regard to the above is this the only disability review the Trust is undertaking? This is a buildings based exercise which is separate to the duties of s149 of the Equality Act. Which is about people.

(b) As a listed authority the Trust must comply with the general equality duty and the specific duties. There appear to be no quality objectives set by the Trust regarding physical and sensory disability. If there are then please provide the link.

Given that there are no beds in the female side of the Acute Assessment ward and only one in the entire hospital inpatient sector please explain how as a body subject to the duty the Trust has sufficient information to pay due regard to this duty. Physical and sensory disability is not referred to in any Equalities Group documents on the website. Therefore please provide information and actual figures of how many people under 65 yrs known to services ( in receipt of care or not) are known to have a physical and/or sensory disability ? How many of these are women?

This is information the Trust should have already published to demonstrate compliance with the general duties of the Equality Act so should not cost more that £450 to provide.If it does it will be assumed that the Trust is non compliant.

(2) It continues to be of great concern that the Trust management, the Matron of the Highgate centre and ward staff believe that it is appropriate and not discriminatory to place a female patient with disability under close observations in a mixed ward environment instead of complying with s149 duties to make reasonable adjustments. Please therefore respond to the following:

(a) The MHA Code of Practice states clearly:

Para 15.40 Increased levels of observation may be used both for the
short-term management of disturbed behaviour and to
prevent suicide or serious self-harm.

Para. 15.41 Interventions (such as .. observation) ….must never be used as punishment or in a punitive manner.

Para. 15.9 Any such intervention must be used in a way that
minimises any risk to the patient’s health and safety and
that causes the minimum interference to their privacy and
dignity..

Para. 15.41 Staff must balance the potentially distressing effects on
the patient of increased levels of observation, particularly
if these levels of observation are proposed for many hours
or days.

15.42 All hospitals should have clear written policies on the use
of observation.

16.2 Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires public authorities to respect a person’s right to a private life. This includes people detained under the Act.
Privacy and safety are therefore important constituents of the therapeutic environment. Hospital staff should make conscious efforts to respect the privacy of patients while
maintaining safety.

The Code of Practice makes it clear that close or enhanced observations are only to be used when a patient's own behaviour is disturbed enough to warrant it. It certainly does not allow for enhanced observations simply because the patient has a physical/sensory disability and/or to compensate for the Trust not meeting s149 duties.

Therefore please explain the legal justification for decisions based on this premise.
Explain how this is not punitive.
Please also provide the Trust policy on enhanced observations highlighting the paragraphs/sections which refer to using these solely on the basis of a patient's disability need.

.
(b) NICE Guidelines refer to enhanced observations in relation to disturbed and violent behaviour state the following. Note they do not endorse using enhanced observations solely because someone has a disability that a hospital has not provided for:

1.1.3.1 The environment should take into account service user needs for:
✦ safety
✦ privacy
✦ dignity
✦ gender – and cultural-sensitivity
✦ sufficient physical space

1.1.3.6 Suitable access facilities are needed for people who have problems with mobility, orientation, visual or hearing impairment or other special needs.

The recommendations and good practice points that follow also address the needs that arise from diversity…....and physical need It is important that service users should not be treated less favourably on the basis of their culture, gender, diagnosis,sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity or religious/spiritual beliefs.

1.4.1.1 All service users, regardless of culture, gender,diagnosis, sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity or religious/spiritual beliefs should be treated with dignity
and respect.

Please explain how the Trust's approach to s149 duties and the patient is consistent with the above.

(c) Very specifically in relation to disability NICE guidelines also state:

1.4.1.7 The physical needs of the service user should be assessed on admission or as soon as possible thereafter and then regularly reassessed. The care plan should reflect
the service user’s physical needs.

1.4.4.1 Each service should have a policy that outlines the procedures for dealing with service users who have disabilities, including those with physical or sensory
impairment and/or other communication difficulties.

1.4.4.2 Individual care plans should detail staff responsibilities for de-escalation, rapid tranquillisation, physical intervention and seclusion of service users who
have disabilities, including those with physical or sensory impairment and/or other communication difficulties.

Please explain outside of MH risk assessment what qualifies ward staff or management to decide on the level of need associated with someone with disability? What precise training have MH ward based staff been given on disability awareness- this is not the same as chronic physical illness need.

Please provide the policy referred to above.

If a patient has identified disability either at time of admission or previously then explain the admission procedures that are followed to ensure that they have additional support and equipment provided.

As a real world example explain how a female patient with high physical support needs who is reliant on aids/adaptations/carer input for all activities of daily living is supported while in an Acute Assessment Unit that does not have disability access on the female side. Stating that they would be 'admitted to Rosewood' is not a sufficient response - you are being asked to explain in context of the Trust claiming it can support such a patient on Sapphire Ward.

Please provide figures of how many female patients with physical/sensory disability have been admitted under the MHA in the last 12 months. How many of these were admitted directly to the Rosewood Unit.Presumably this data is available in order for the Trust to comply with the general duties of the Act.

(3) The Trust has more than one female under 65 yrs known to services that has physical and/or sensory disability
Please explain exactly what happens when more than one woman with physical disability is admitted under the MHA given that there is only minimally one accessible room in Rosewood unit.

(4) The statements within the responses appear to show the Trust to be in breach of legislation. These statements are backed up by experiences of female patients with disability as the Trust is aware.They example prohibited conduct under the Act as as they are direct discrimination and dual discrimination due to protected characteristics. In simple terms treating someone differently because of disability is prohibited egs Not allowing same access to a protected female environment due to disability need is discrimination as is placing them on enhanced observations to protect them from risk from others because they are disabled..

The following statements appear to confirm the contention :

'Regarding alternative options for women with disabilities who require admission for acute mental distress, other than the Trust’s contract for female only Psychiatric Intensive Care, there are no other options than either admission to Rosewood or admission to an either/or bed on either the assessment ward or a treatment ward'

'In cases where there are female patients with disabilities requiring female only areas then these individuals can be referred to Rosewood or, if this is not possible or appropriate, then other care management systems can be implemented (for example the use of enhanced observations)'

'The ward is compliant with DDA standards and therefore can cater for those with a disability '

'The Trust would use enhanced observations of patients where vulnerability and risk are a factor taking careful consideration of the capabilities of the patient when selecting a bed'.

'The Trust has found that there may have been occasions when someone with a physical disability was admitted to a private sector mental health bed, but this would have been because at the time of referral they had a mental health problem and be in need for a specialist mental health service..........Again the circumstances would be for mental health reasons primarily and not because of the disability, should there be one.'
'
In relation to the above and with particular reference to the last statement (from Internal review 1st May 2014):

Explain how if the Trust meets it's duties under s149 (let alone HRA legislation) disability need is NOT considered as equal to and on par with mental health reasons referred to

and

how limiting access to female protected ward areas and placing on enhanced observations DOES NOT put the disabled patient at substantial disadvantage compared with someone who is not disabled?

Provided here is link to the relevant legislation http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010...

The failure of C&I to respond to these enquiries within statutory time limits has been noted.As has the avoidance of a response while the CQC inspection was in progress.

Presumably by now the Trust has actually established a robust published policy and associated guidance that can be provided, particularly as concerns have been raised regarding failings in individual's care.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

2 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed,
 
Sorry for the delay in acknowledging your request. Please note that the
attached acknowledgement does not affect the statutory time limit. The
Trust will still endeavour to respond to your request within 20 working
days from receipt of your request.
Kind regards
Wayne Elliott
Interim Information Governance Officer
 
 
Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 3114
Email                      [1][email address]
Online                     [2]www.candi.nhs.uk
 
Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust
1^st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital
4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE
 
 
 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd E. Colville anodiad ()

D.Speers here!
NICE guidance 1.4.1.1 All service users, regardless of culture, gender,diagnosis,sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity or religious/spiritual
beliefs should be treated with dignity and respect.......sounds not implemented! But is NICE guidance optional? What does the MHA state re dignity and respect!

Byfield, Mandy, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

4 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed

 

I am writing to update you regarding your request for information.  Please
accept my apology on behalf of the Trust for the delay in responding and
for any inconvenience caused.

 

I anticipate that your response will be due for release by 10 October
2014.  I will continue to update you.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Mandy Byfield

Interim Information Governance Officer

 

Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 3114

Email                          [1][email address]

Online                       [2]www.candi.nhs.uk

 

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1^st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital

4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE

[3]Description: Description: Description: Description:
cid:image003.jpg@01CEAA60.05BF0470

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.candi.nhs.uk/

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

2 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed

 

I am writing to update you regarding your request for information.  Please
accept my apology on behalf of the Trust for the delay in responding and
failing to meet the anticipated release date of 10 October 2014.

 

I  can assure you that work has begun on your request for an internal
review and anticipate that your response will be due for release by 8
November 2014.   

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Mandy Byfield

Interim Information Governance Officer

 

Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 3114

Email                          [1][email address]

Online                       [2]www.candi.nhs.uk

 

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1^st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital

4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE

 

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.candi.nhs.uk/

Dear Mandy Byfield,

C&I's disregard for meeting deadlines for responses to FOI requests is seen as a reflection of the poor service delivery to patients under your care .

Particularly crisis care where CQC have yet again criticised the Trust for failing to make admission wards safe and the crisis care pathway where there have been clusters of suicides recently and the Coroner has had to ask the Trust to investigate.

The Equality Act has been in force since 2010.It is now 2014. The requirements are basic and yet the Trust does not seem to either have any awareness of their legal responsibilities towards people with physical or sensory disability NOR any intent to comply.

You should have ALL this information in place already as it is a requirement of duty to ensure that as a Trust you have procedures that inform compliance.

To maintain that the Acute Admissions ward is appropriate when there are NO female side accessible rooms AND you are fully aware of CURRENT cases where women cannot be accommodated in crisis is frankly appalling.

To maintain that Drayton Park is an alternative to ALL women with disability shows such scant regard for the requirements of the Act and such disrespect for the needs of individual women that it is now farcical.

Individuals with disability report back that it is NOT fully accessible to their needs AND no reasonable adjustments are made as required by the specific duty. Not really surprising since no Trust staff seem to be aware that they should even consider individual needs.

Furthermore admission to ANY crisis house is discretionary . NO admissions are made under the MHA as they do NOT serve this purpose.The FOI request is about acute admissions to HOSPITAL .

The Trust has an existing case of a woman in severe MH crisis who has undergone Mental Heatha Act assessments but cannot be found a suitable bed within the Trust that meet her physical disability needs as the trust REFUSES to consider placement in the private sector.So despite her being actively psychotic and suicidal C&I have NO provision for her.

You have stated that you don't consider physical/sensory disability when admitting under the MHA. You have provided misleading responses regarding the role of crisis houses.If they are not misleading then it shows Trust managers apparently do not know that the appropriateness of each crisis house will have been considered PRIOR to consideration to hospital admission, that NO crisis house can admit under MHA, that crisis houses can and do REFUSE referrals and admissions.

You have stated that there is ONLY ONE accessible bed in the ENTIRE Trust for women under 65 yrs with disability. This room in Rosewood has basic PHYSICAL adaptations. There is NO provision for additional staff to provide support for needs associated with disability even when the same patient has been assessed under social care as having critical and/or substantial need ( and a care package).

There is no access to IMMEDIATE access to urgent OT assessment on admission. There has been shown to be NO access to basic additional equipment on admission.

The suggestion that it is appropriate for someone to be placed on close observations SOLELY on the grounds that you placed them outside of the women's side of a ward and that this means they are at further risk from MALE patients borders on an admission of negligence.

That ANY nursing staff/ ward manager/Matron should think this is appropriate is appalling and breaches the NMC Code of Practice as well as the MHA Code of Practice. As stated all NICE guidelines are also breached

C&I have had a year to respond to these requests. There are EXISTING formal complaints about failure to provide for women with disabilities. There are cases of women with disability who cannot get admission to suitable settings solely because their disability are not met and the Trust has NO INTENTION of being compliant.

Drayton Park has and does regularly refuse admission on clinical grounds - it is an OPTIONAL alternative and not pertinent to the question raised under this FOI request regarding HOSPITAL admission. However if you want to extend any Trust review to there we suggest you do it with some disability expertise as there quite obviously NONE within C&I.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Dear Information, Freedom,

Same request made to SLAM. Here is an example of how C&I should record information and respond. Difference is they have assessed for disability need and C&I haven't.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/f...

Why do you not have this level of information to hand?

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Dear Acosia Nyanin specifically,

Explain within your response how a female pt with physical disability placed on close observations in an accessible room by the nurses station has her privacy respected?

You have stated that this is considered acceptable. Yet the nursing station is within a mixed area where male pts have free access. Close observations are on ALL wards done by a nurse sitting with the door ajar watching the pt in their room. Where in a mixed area male patients can then with ease view and hear the female pt.
This is incredibly unsafe AND gives the female pt NO dignity or privacy. Again discriminatory, unsafe and hugely distressing to female patients- which you know from current cases

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

Dear Mr Syed

I write further to your emails dated 25 and 27 October 2014.

Please be advised that the Trust is working towards a response to your emails.

In the meantime if you wish to make a complaint about the concerns you have raised, the contact details are set out below:

Tel: 020 3317 3117
Email: [email address]

Alternatively, you can write to the Chief Executive Freepost address below. No stamp is required:

Advice and Complaints Service
Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust
Freepost First Class (LON12613)
London
NW1 0YT.

I will continue to keep you updated.

Yours sincerely

Mandy Byfield
Interim Information Governance Officer

Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 3114
Email                      [email address]
Online                     www.candi.nhs.uk

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust
1st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital
4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Mandy Byfield,

You may want to refer to the Chief Executive Wendy Wallace at this point as the issues of failure to comply with the Equality Act, the breaches of the MH Code of Practice and NICE guidelines have ALL been complained about to the Trust on multiple occasions.

This includes the case below which Wendy Wallace is very well informed about and has been giving executive decisions about. If there was an single one off incident where the Trust apologised and adjusted all protocols so that it was compliant - that would be one thing.

But that is not what is happening here. Non compliance is with full endorsement of the senior executive of C&I and is indicative of a culture within the Trust. The very fact that when you have incidents you don't review compliance confirms this .

What is somewhat worse is that not a single response shows ANY understanding of s149 of the Equality Act. You claim to be totally oblivious of it in line with all findings about lack of parity of care in MH settings. The constant referral to the DDA and buildings and trying to justify appalling care practices to cover the failings is unacceptable.

To infer that the Trust is not fully aware of general and individual concerns and formal complaints is dismissive.The Trust is FULLY aware that there is an ONGOING investigation in to safeguarding failures which includes placing a woman in inaccessible accommodation and not meeting identified disability needs.

At present - RIGHT NOW- there is a case of an extremely vulnerable individual who has been told that she is refused admission to the designated bed at Rosewood Ward that the response refer to.This is someone whose physical disability needs are assessed at the critical and substantial level at social care assessment - by your Trust and the local authority.

Trust colleagues have confirmed this and Camden's AMHP service have been told that she can ONLY be admitted to the inaccessible room at Highgate or placed in the same ward OUTSIDE the female area with all the associated risks identified.

What has now happened in this case borders on catastrophic- again as Wendy Wallace is DIRECTLY aware of as she has been included in all e mail communication. And the situation that exists is because the Trust would rather place a high risk vulnerable woman at even more risk rather than admit they were not able to meet her needs and fund somewhere that can

The Trust is not compliant with the Equality Act and has made absolutely NO provision for this group of patients.It is that simple and there are cases exampling this.

On an individual level the refusal to find and fund accessible beds for women in a safe all female environment is tantamount to negligence in certain cases. You have a duty to provide. It is that simple.

And in specific reference to the issue of raising a complaint - those pts/ Su /carers/ supporters who do report back regularly that the responses to complaints are inadequate, the Trust is obstructive and the risk of retribution from services is experienced as extremely high. Many many SU state that they are too frightened to complain because of this.

Strongly suggest your complaints team familiarise themselves with the Hart/Clywd report on the failure of the NHS Complaints process to which a SU from C&I was INVITED to give evidence to because of the Trust's appalling responses. Look how long a FOI request that you are required by law to respond to in 20 days takes- this is now about 400 days. SU/pts/carers experience EXACTLY the same level of delay when raising concerns.

In certain cases- the Trust has been overtly hostile, withdrawn services and in a recent case in the Camden New Journal your Chair Leisha Fullick made a personal attack on a carer who has very serious ongoing concerns regarding the Trust.

It is an appalling situation and in clear breach of the law and all good practice. In a Trust that claims to have an Equality Group - yet not one that has ANY knowledge of the law and how to apply it in a hospital setting.

The Trust claims expertise in women's issues because it has a forum and an all female crisis house. Just not for women with physical and sensory disability placed in hospital

Did NONE of these professionals think outside the silo mentality of their own team?

Maybe the 'Equality Lead' and the 'Women's lead' would like to add comment to why these practices are acceptable and why there is ONLY one BASIC accessible room for women under 65 in the ENTIRE Trust hospital sector and why the specific needs of these women are not met as the law requires.

To be frank each and every response shows such a lack of basic understanding about disability that it so discriminatory to be offensive. It is also clinically dangerous- as you are well aware given the case referred to.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Gadawodd D. Speers anodiad ()

Basic humanity is being flouted ...as well as the Equality Act,
breaches of the MH Code of Practice & lack of implementation of NICE guidelines.
What message is this giving?

Gadawodd christina moriarty anodiad ()

There is a significant problem regarding physical disability issues .There have been complaints about lack of provision for the deaf community and disability forums have discussed access problems for women on many occasions.

The Trust has been approached about this at all levels again and again. There are several examples of women who have had no access to MH crisis support where the Crisis Team is inappropriate.

And some of the language used by staff is discriminatory and appalling and if used in respect of race- another protected characteristic - would be considered unacceptable.

The mixed more modern crisis houses have basic DDA compliance but as stated here that is NOT the same as making the reasonable adjustments for disability that the PSED requires.
.
In our experience thee is absolutely NO provision for immediate and urgent OT access and access to disability aids. There is no understanding re disability and it is grossly offensive for ANY MH staff at the Trust to assume or take the position that they are the experts in someone else's lived experience.

Have none of these people followed the debates on parity of esteem. Do they really think physical disability is an illness ? Complete utter failure in provision a silo mentality with a major dose of arrogance on their part.

Maybe we should publish some of the more offensive comments made by crisis and ward staff to illustrate the point?

Gadawodd sally mehmet anodiad ()

On this I am going to post some of the comments the disability community has heard from crisis and ward staff . Done a quick compilation but it actually formed subject for discussion as an issue and one that people had raised either at point of admission or afterwards.

So here goes:
-We only have a room on the top floor with no lift access
-We cant ask other women to move as it may upset them
-We don't have staff to help you in the bath/shower because of the cuts ( crisis house and wards- repeatedly heard
-This is a mental health ward we don't do personal care for people who are disabled
- I cant help you dress due to health and safety as I am not trained ( yes , really!)
- If you come here you will have to bring your own aids (crisis house)
- We dont have non slip mats as it is an infection control issue
- We wont allow your carers to come and help you - its policy (wards)
- Other people cant come in your room (wards)
- Why didn't you call someone ( when the individual had no alarm bell and their phone had been taken from them and had fallen)
- We check pts/ residents regularly so will find you if you have fallen (!)

And in the most offensive category indicating the culture of the Trust:
- It's not our job to offer you help you should ask if you need anything
- We don't read Crisis Plans we don't have time
- If you fall a lot you really shouldn't be here
- Of course we take disabled people here - we had someone in a wheelchair once ( from a manager)

As stated an Equality and Diversity Policy that doesn't refer to physical disability /sensory disability at all. A Women's forum and steering group only open by invitation. A MH Trust whose staff think that disability = illness.

Gadawodd Name withheld on this occasion anodiad ()

I am a disabled women and prefer to stay with women and be treated by women as I often need help with very personal things and the MH Trust often think it is OK to allocate a male nurse for this.

I and the forum I go to have followed this request and have found it very informative as we did not realise how far the trust will go to discriminate against us.People have asked me to write on here as it is untrue what the trust says about providing disabled women with help. ALL the comments above are familiar to us.

I dont know about the other crisis houses although have visited someone at Daleham Gardens who was in the disabled room but not managing well as it doesnt have many adaptations.

I have stayed at Drayton Park a couple of years back and the staff were nice but clueless about disability.Very simple requests that I needed for safety were ignored or forgotten about as they are busy and so focused on mental health needs. It was degrading to have to keep asking for help .

But it is not what disabled people would describe as accessible . Unless in the last 3 years it has had an overhaul that I and other disabled women dont know about.

Firstly it has steps up to the building and the only ramped entrance is and extremely steep slope in the car park area where staff park their cars and there is often little space to get by.

For people who use walking aids, have difficulty with mobility or whose wheelchair is manual it is too difficult. I don't think this complys with disability law - my OT has seen it and she says it doesnt.Also there is no bell at the front of the building to summon help if the car park is full or you need help on the slope.

Two people I know wanted to go to Open Days there but couldnt because of this.

They have 2 large rooms on the upper ground floor that has wheelchair turning space. They often have a family in one of these rooms. One room has a low shelf area for kettle etc but I have never seen facilities there and I was told they couldn't be provided because of health and safety !

NEITHER of the bathrooms are accessible - except maybe one sink. The 'wheelchair' room has a step in bath ! Some rails but nothing else - how is this accessible and passes the law on adaptations?

The other room again is big but has a step in shower. Again not adapted.

If Drayton Park was accessible to women it would have a wet room in each of these bathrooms NOT what is there now.
The staff there are nice but really dont understand this at all.And if you ever ask anything they will say it cant happen because of the cuts.

We hope someone takes the Trust to court on this because disabled women dont get help with MH when we need this and everyone I know has the same stories.

Gadawodd D. Speers anodiad ()

Would be very interested in a comment from the "equalities lead" and "women's lead" ....if they exist!!

Gadawodd D. Speers anodiad ()

Surely a few stats are available?

Gadawodd Matthew Syed anodiad ()

They were going to reply by the 10th October and then deferred this to 8th November ( so by end of today).W e won't hold our breaths.

And yes they claim to have an Equalities Lead - from the Mickey Mouse school of Diversity we would suggest at this point given that apparently they have (a) No idea what happens within their own Trust and (b) When they are informed have apparently never heard of the PSED and the s149 requirements for reasonable adjustments.

The Womans Lead is actually the manager of the women's crisis house referred to above (Drayton Park).The one that the Trust refers to in previous responses and that thinks a big room = disability provision and a step in bath or shower is exactly what a woman with physical/mobility difficulties needs. Even if that woman has a fully OT adapted bathroom at home, even if there is a care package in place, even if activities of daily living have been assessed by other Trust staff at the substantial and critical level ! That last statement also applies to the wards.

It's not that the Trust has not been told - it is that women with protected charactaristics of disability are invisible. The very first response to the query of accessible rooms on wards Trust staff took to mean accessible to them as staff!! Really.It beggars belief

Gadawodd D. Speers anodiad ()

My son was "found" fatally wounded in a bathroom at West London MH Trust where he had been detained "for his own safety" . We are told the reason a young FEMALE HCA was on "enhanced observations"(within eyesight) and allowed my son to be in a bathroom alone.....was due to fact? all "male staff were needed to restrain a non-compliant patient".
There are no records explaining this.....and as my son has died I am the only voice left for him! BTW the PHSO wont investigate as "there are not enough records" "Sorry! Isn't that the investigation WHY NOT?"

Dear Mandy Byfield and Acosia Nyanin,

The Trust has now missed every single legal deadline regarding the safe provision of disability access for women admitted to hospital.Presumably because you have no insight or concept that this legislation applies to C&I.

Every single point raised should be very easily accessible as it is needed in order for the Trust to be compliant with the PSED,the MHA Code of Practice and all NICE guidelines

Clearly the Trust is not compliant .This has now been addressed within this FOI request, and within all feedback from women denied access - which equates to de facto refusal of care. Your Equality/Diversity Lead and your Women's Lead should read the comments and be asked to explain the purpose of their roles.

C&I appear to have no knowledge or association with any disability organisation at all let alone invite feedback.Other FOI requests on this site confirm that there is no representation.

Wendy Wallace the Chief Executive had already been written to regarding this on many occasions.There are existing complaints - including formal ones- regarding access for women.None of which the Trust has responded to. So please do not refer to C&I's complaints procedure again .

There is a current Local Authority Safeguarding investigation regarding the Trust placing a woman in an INACCESSIBLE bed with NO support so you should be very focussed.

There is a CURRENT case where there is neither crisis support access at home nor crisis house access nor hospital admission access nor any single place of safety as the woman has physical disability and her needs can not safely be met within the Trust. Despite MHA assessments.

And instead of securing a hospital bed elsewhere in another sector C&I have left a woman at high risk in crisis while as a Trust you have made a publicly stated decision that you refuse to consider disability needs on admission to any sector within the Trust. This is illegal and denies care.

Please do not make any reference to the Ombudsman or the ICO as this issue is beyond their remit as you should be well aware.To be frank it is considered extremely patronising by the women with disability that this FOI request is raised on behalf of. In line with their experience of trying to raise this at a local level or through formal complaint. It is TOTALLY untrue to state that women haven't raised concerns or complaints .It is TOTALLY true to state that you ignored all concerns - otherwise you would be compliant.

You have had since 2010 to address this - 4 years since the legislation came in to force.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Gadawodd D. Speers anodiad ()

This situation us very worrying and clearly the Trust is non-compliant. I agree ref to PHSOO and ICO is a delaying tactic. The legislation is in place and must be adhered to. Patients Needs must come first!

Gadawodd Nisha Patel anodiad ()

All this really upsets me as I look after my mum and she has had the same problems as she walks very slowly and has a stick or sometimes a frame at home.The trust put her on a ward in highgate hospital that was mixed. First they put her in the womens side but men walk in and out of it as the doors are always open. The staff dont stop the men. It was called saphire ward.

But my mum couldnt wash herself in the shower and the staff refused to help her>She was very frail and unwell and very very scared and she was weak as she hadn't eaten for a while. She kept falling over. So they put her next to the nurse station and it was really bad then.

Men hang around the nurse station and went in and out of my mum's room as there was no one to stop them. We told the nurses but they said they couldn't watch out for her all the time. They didnt care and lots were agency staff from abroad.

She had been sectioned so could not leave. My brother shouted at the nurses and was told they would call security. We thought we should call the police as the men there were unwell but also shouting and two of them had a fight outside my mums door and the nurses didnt do anything at all.

Women must not be put with men ever. My mum is disabled and they nearly killed her by doing this. She said she would kill herself if she stayed there and another woman tried to . It is a horrible place. My sister works in Hackney in mental health and they have all womens wards. My mum was not told about Drayton Park but they dont take women if they are sectioned? The doctors took her off the section and we took her home.

She has said she will kill herself rather than go on that ward again as she was unsafe from the men.I think all women are unsafe there but disabled women are really unsafe. Male patients go in and out of the womens side and womens rooms and the nurses do nothing. One night the nurse who was meant to be watching my mum was sitting on a chair and was asleep and so couldnt watch out for her.

Is there a person who is meant to protect women there? What is a lead please? I would tell all families to keep their mums, sisters, cousins, daughters away from the trust. They lied to us and said our mum would be looked after and she was put in danger. We did complain to them but not in a letter.

Gadawodd christina moriarty anodiad ()

If the Trust cared at all about vulnerable people who had physical disability they would have complied with the law a long time a go.
They are more concerned about their own reputation and image than about patient care. Look how many deaths there have been now.

Everyone knows many women don't feel safe on wards- it is why a Woman's crisis house was set up ( and also at the time C&I had the highest rate of sexual assault on wards of any Trust in the country).

Everyone knows that people have died on the wards recently who have been under close observations - meaning a nurse has had to have them in sight at all times.The coroner has repeatedly criticised C&I.

There is a Womens Forum held at Highgate Hospital which is a sick joke given that Highgate is inaccessible via public transport to people with physical disability. There is an FOI request about this on this site. And only certain SU ever get invited to forums. Never women who might voice a problem.

I was close to a woman who was a wheelchair user who committed suicide .She gave up asking for help from the Trust as she couldnt get the help she needed. I have heard other women talk about being terrified when they have been a patient and at the carers group it has come up that women are not safe and that women who are physically disabled do not get the support they need.

How can C&I state that putting a disabled woman outside the female area is safe ? It is not ever safe.

Gadawodd Richard Bentall anodiad ()

My sister is under this trust. She has Schizophrenia and she is also disabled and needs help especially when she is very ill. I am her carer. I go to carers groups and we do talk about the wards and some people have complained because the family member is not looked after properly.I dont know all the law but I do know that the hospital does not look after disabled people properly

When she is unwell she gets very scared and has had very bad experiences of men on the wards she is put on who walk in to the womens areas and sometimes are in the bedrooms and are often half dressed and speak aggressively and sexually.She always goes to Highgate wards and I didnt know there was a woman's ward. She has been put in rooms where she has fallen over because at home she has a toilet frame and rails but the ward does not have these.I was told that only the mens side has disabled rooms but then she was put by the nurse station and that was so bad because men were always loitering and the noise was awful and she became more scared and more ill. It is right by the mens side and she was too scared to leave the room.

Like the other person here I told the nurses and a person in charge and I was told that they could not stop this unless a man actually harms a woman then they can medicate him. One nurse said they know women arent safe there.I have seen women half dressed and men be sexually explicit and showing their genitals in the reception area by the nurse station. This is also on Sapphire Ward.

The GP and the mental health team always told us that Drayton Park will not accept her and so she always has to go to hospital as the crisis team doesn't work for her.This is what the crisis team tell the GP - that Drayton Park can't look after and that it is a house without disability rooms but then she goes to hospital and there still aren't disability rooms.. So I don't understand why they say the crisis houses take women if they are disabled because they don't. Lots of carers didn't know there was a womens crisis house.

Also you have to be careful if you complain as we have seen what the undercover TV programmes show and I dont think it is safe to have men and women on the same ward and I don't think disabled women should be anywhere near mens side of wards as they cant look after themselves and are very vulnerable.

Richard

Gadawodd christina moriarty anodiad ()

This is the MH Trust's Equality and Diversity Annual Report 2013

http://www.candi.nhs.uk/_uploads/documen...

There is not a single reference to disability in the entire report. Not one. There is much emphasis on Women's forums and Crisis House but even within this NO reference to physical or sensory disability needs of women. Not one.

To say women with physical disability are invisible in the Trust is an understatement - they don't even believe they exist if this report and the FOI responses are anything to go by.

How can an Equality and Diversity Group not consider these issues AT ALL?

It is led by Wendy Wallace the CE who is very aware of individual complaints about access for women as it has been raised with her and we know is subject to formal complaint and apparently a formal safeguarding investigation (according to Camden Council who confirm they are investigating the Trust for failing to protect a disabled woman).

If the Trust was compliant or even working towards equality it would at least have the figures requested to hand. But it doesn't.

What I and others would like to know is how the CE who is aware of everyone's complaints about this has not fed back to this group?

This is a Public Law issue and should now be challenged through the courts. In addition each and every front line worker and their manager has a professional Code of Practice that they are breaching when they do not offer care that is dignified, within the law and causes the patient harm. Not providing disabled women with the adjustments required causes harm.

I too would be VERY interested to hear a direct comment from the Women's lead and the Equality and Diversity Lead as to why these issues are not addressed.

Gadawodd Richard Taylor anodiad ()

It is not appropriate for WhatDoTheyKnow.com to be used for anything other than making or following up FOI requests (or adding annotations which assist others obtain the information they are seeking).

There are other websites where comments on NHS services can be left. I note St Pancras Hospital staff respond to comments left on the NHS Choices website at:

https://www.nhs.uk/Services/hospitals/Re...

One annotation which was not appropriate for our site has been removed.

--

Richard - WhatDoTheyKnow.com volunteer

Dear Mandy Byfield

Either the Trust is the most incompetent in the entire MH NHS Trust sector or they know that to respond is an acknowledgement of poor and discriminatory practice.

This is ONLY difficult to respond to if as a Trust you are acting outside the law. As I understand it there is no longer even ONE available disability accessible bed in the Trust now as Rosewood ward was closed for refurbishment..

So please explain what has happened with women with disability needing admission during refurbishment? Is the Trust aware of any women who have had to self fund urgent crisis care or admission themselves either in the UK or outside the UK because there has been no accessible ward accommodation available?
(On these last points an urgent response is requested even if you continue to choose not to respond to the rest if the FOI for now)

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Gadawodd Amy Stayt anodiad ()

My understanding is that Rosewood Ward was shut while the Trust refurbishes leaving no disability access beds anywhere in area.

I am very surprised to read Trust responses that premises are DDA compatible and therefore this meets the need of women with disability as even this statement does not match our experience in the disability community.

And as stated they seem to be totally ignorant of the Equality Act requirement for reasonable adjustments. They should be able to give figuress on how many women with disabilities are known to them as they cannot plan services without this information.

Like the requester we all query why if compliant C&I cant respond to basic information

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

5 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed

 

Please see attached, an acknowledgement of your request for information.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

Mandy Byfield

Interim Information Governance Officer

 

Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 7099

Email                          [1][email address]

Online                       [2]www.candi.nhs.uk

 

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1^st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital

4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE

[3]Description: Description: Description: Description:
cid:image003.jpg@01CEAA60.05BF0470

 

 

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd Amy Stayt anodiad ()

We are all wondering exactly why C&I have not responded to this FOI request. The comments from disabled service users and their carers is disturbing. I too have heard of women unable to access hospital admission as there are no accessible beds. I also know women who could not be accommodated at the women only crisis house as it did not meet their disability needs and therefore they were denied crisis care.I also know someone who was a wheelchair user in Camden who ended their life without access to inpatient care.

A common complaint is that ward and crisis house staff can not /choose not to access urgent OT assessment and can not/don't see the need to access portable aids such as toilet frames, bath boards etc. Patient's additional care needs can not be catered for and ward staff and crisis house staff have stated this

C&I should be ashamed at this situation as it has caused immense distress and harm to women with disabilities and a huge additional pressure on carers. Why are MH inpatient staff not disability aware?

Information, Freedom, Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

5 Atodiad

Dear Mr Syed

 

Please see the attached outcome of your request for information.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

 

Mandy Byfield

Interim Information Governance Officer

 

Telephone               +44 (0)20 3317 7099

Email                          [1][email address]

Online                       [2]www.candi.nhs.uk

 

Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust

1^st Floor, East Wing, St Pancras Hospital

4 St Pancras Way, London NW1 0PE

[3]Description: Description: Description: Description:
cid:image003.jpg@01CEAA60.05BF0470

 

 

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Mandy Byfield

The Trust has STILL not replied to the FOI request dated 31st August 2014.

Why not?

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Dear Mandy Byfield

As pointed out to above C&I have still NOT responded to the FOI request of August 2014 - 5 months after the request was made. Therefore I request an internal review for this request.

C&I policy on not accommodating women with physical disability in the safe surroundings of a women's environment is having serious impact on the disability community as the comments on this board show.Since the Executive apparently have to approve every FOI request then the Executive must be fully aware of the extent of the problem by now. Please confirm if it is the Executive's decision to refuse to respond to any FOI requests regarding compliance with s149 of the Public Sector Equality Duty.

In response to '“Is the Trust aware of any women who have had to self-fund urgent crisis care or admission themselves either in the UK or outside the UK because there has been no accessible ward accommodation available?” the Trust has responded no.

However the Camden AMHP team were notified in e mail in October 2014 by the carer of a female SU that as the Trust could not offer safe accessible accommodation in a women's acute setting, she had to be taken out of the country for urgent mental health care abroad where her physical disability needs could also be met.

The AMHP team closed the referral on the grounds that she was out of the UK and they no longer had jurisdiction. The AMHP team are based within the Trust. So the Trust is aware of at least one case.

The sole reason for this was that C&I at the time confirmed that NO accessible beds were available for women with physical disability and so the patient would have to be placed OUTSIDE the women's ward area.NO consideration was given to finding a suitable acute sector bed that could accommodate her disability either within another Trust or in the private sector and this was confirmed to the carer via the AMHP team.

This is an actual case relating DIRECTLY to the issues you now refuse to respond to in the FOI request of August 2014. It is a situation you claim would be a 'never event' although feedback from other women is that it is an ongoing problem.

There are also several anecdotal cases that have come to light where for other reasons family have taken acutely ill SU's out of UK as there have been 'no beds available' .Please review your response and comment on if the Trust is aware of these .

Given the inaccuracy of your reply an internal review is requested so that the Trust can provide accurate information. Please confirm which teams/directorates this FOI was sent to .

If you do not keep accurate information on cases that have had to self fund either in the UK or abroad then clarify that in the response. To state the Trust is not aware of any cases is simply grossly inaccurate - particularly when the case referred to had to seek acute care because no accessible accommodation was available and there is documentation confirming this.

Presumably the Trust's management is not so divorced from front line workforce that it is not aware of the range of consequences of no suitable beds being available?

There are currently investigations in to clusters of deaths in the crisis care pathway so presumably cases where suitable beds have not been available are being examined.

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Dear Mandy Byfield and Wendy Wallace

STILL awaiting response for internal review. Suggest the reason the Trust can not respond is that you have already revealed that you are in clear breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty .

As a MH Trust you are of course fully aware of the revised 2015 Mental Health Act Code of Practice 2015. You are required by law to be guided by it so you may want to read section 3.11 - 3.14. This specifically covers your responsibility and spells it out in plain clear English.

Still don't understand or is it that in mental health patients have such little value that you think the laws on Equality shouldn't apply?

This won't be going away as an issue. Not responding simply escalates actions and puts the Trust in the spotlight. Particularly as you have cases where you know someone needs urgent crisis care and have denied them this

Yours sincerely,

Matthew Syed

Gadawodd Matthew Syed anodiad ()

God forbid anyone needs admission

Gadawodd Doug Paulley anodiad ()

We re-iterate our policy that annotations on requests must be made solely to assist the requester in obtaining the information they are requesting or to assist them in acting upon the information they have received. Comments about the NHS or others should be taken elsewhere, as fellow volunteer Richard has already pointed out. Further, posting of significant personal information puts both you and us at risk. I have therefore removed one annotation and prevented any further annotations from being posted on this request.
--
Doug - volunteer, WhatDoTheyKnow