Skip to content
recurance

Discharge without family involvement in planning

Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate4 reports · 2019–2023No published response to an earlier report One-page brief (print or PDF)

Northumberland received 4 coroners' reports about this hazard between 29 Oct 2019 and 7 Jun 2023.

They came from 3 different coroners in 3 coroner areas. A similar concern was raised again 3 times after the first warning.

A published response was found for 2 of the 3 earlier reports, stating 3 specific actions.

4
reports
3
different coroners
2019–2023
years
0.80
lowest link confidence

The story, report by report

Spacing grows with the time between reports.

  1. First warning

    Charlotte Grace↗

    29 Oct 2019 · Nicholas Shaw · Cumbria

    “[the deceased] was discharged despite there being no input from those to whose care she was being entrusted.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Northumberland responded.Response (PDF) ↗

  2. 3 years 3 months later

    Raised again · 1st time

    Daniel Futers↗

    2 Feb 2023 · Derek Winter · Sunderland

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
    “Comprehensive planning for home leave and discharge from hospital was not evident, including contingency planning and the involvement of the family.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Northumberland responded.Response (PDF) ↗

  3. 3 months later

    Raised again · 2nd time

    Odessa Carey↗

    12 May 2023 · Andrew Hetherington · North Northumberland and South Northumberland

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
    “I am concerned that following discharge from the Lowry ward to the community and prior to discharge from the community treatment team, the deceased was seen only four times in person by individuals from the mental health team and only once by the care coordinator.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Repeated from the earlier report:dischargetreatmentteam

    No published response from Northumberland was found for this report.

  4. 1 month later

    Raised again · 3rd time

    Brenda Shields↗

    7 Jun 2023 · Nicholas Shaw · Cumbria

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.85 · high
    “[the deceased] was discharged without any planned follow up. Her family were not involved in the discharge process despite assurances that they would be,”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Repeated from the earlier report:dischargeddespite

    Northumberland responded, stating 3 specific actions.Response (PDF) ↗

    “Discharge processes to be reviewed by Hadrian Ward to ensure onward referrals are communicated with receiving teams”

    Stated timescale: 5 April 2023

    “For the team to continue monitoring and assurance of care giver inclusion in safety planning and discharge planning”

    Stated timescale: May 2023 audit, August repeat

    1 more stated action in the Promises tab.

  5. All reports to Northumberland

Next

This shows that a similar concern was raised again after an earlier report. It does not say why, and it is not a finding about any organisation or person. To report an error, see the corrections route.

  • Built with
  • NVIDIA Nemotron Nano, Super and Ultra
  • Nebius Token Factory inference
  • Qwen3 Embedding 8B on Token Factory
  • Tavily follow-up web search
  • Postgres and pgvector search
  • Next.js site

Source: Prevention of Future Deaths reports and responses published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary at judiciary.uk. Crown copyright, used under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Data updated 26 Oct 2026.

A link shows that a similar concern was raised again, not why. It is not a finding about any organisation or person. Methodology and responsible use · Report an error