NHS : Hospital Fined For False Imprisonment : Vulnerable Patient Refused To Be Allowed Home

**Hospital fined for false imprisonment after refusing to let patient go

The Sunday Telegraph12 May 2019 HEALTH CORRESPONDENT By Henry Bodkin

AN NHS hospital has become the first to be fined for false imprisonment of a patient after refusing to allow a vulnerable woman to go home with her family.**

King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust kept the pensioner against her wishes for four months before sending her “to die” in an inadequately briefed nursing home. Legal experts say the High Court judgment, which imposed “exceptional” aggravated damages on the trust, sets a precedent which would significantly strengthen patients’ rights.

Christina Esegbona was admitted to the hospital in south London with heart problems, but then deteriorated as her requests to be allowed home into the care of her children – two of whom are medically qualified – were ignored. In June 2011, doctors arranged to discharge her into a care facility two hours from her family home, deliberately informing her children too late for them to prevent it; records show that staff also discussed calling security guards to the ward if the family intervened.

The 67-year-old, who was registered blind, died in Wilsmere House nursing home, Harrow, nine days later from cardiac arrest having “pulled out” the tube that helped her breathe. Staff at King’s had seen Mrs Esegbona do the same thing two months before, yet failed properly to inform the nursing home of the risk. Judge Coe QC said the patient might have avoided that fate had she been allowed home to her family.

She found the trust liable for false imprisonment for not allowing the patient home while simultaneously failing to conduct a statutory mental capacity assessment, against the advice of its own psychiatrist. Nigel Poole QC, head of King’s Chambers, said he believed this was the first time an NHS hospital had been sanctioned for breaching the law in this way.

The trust was also found to be negligent for sending Mrs Esegbona to the nursing home without telling staff how closely she needed to be watched. The judge said the attitude of medical staff on the Lonsdale Ward had been “highhanded” and “oppressive”.

“Her frustration and distress would have been significantly reduced had she better understood and been more involved in what was happening and had she had… some hope that measures were being taken to explore the possibility of her going home,” she said. Dr Gloria Esegbona, a senior obstetrician, revealed the first thing her mother had said at Wilsmere House was “that she had been sent there to die”.

She and her siblings visited their mother every day of her eight-month stay at King’s College Hospital. Despite this, the staff member responsible for arranging Mrs Esegbona’s discharge wrote “not to be discussed with patient’s family” in the notes. In court, Dr Esegbona described “frantic attempts” by her family to contact the hospital once they found out about the discharge to Wilsmere House, however they could not get in touch until the transfer was under way.

The family dispute the court’s finding that Mrs Esegbona removed the tracheostomy tube, but agree that the trust’s negligent handover contributed to her death. Many previous cases concerning deprivation of liberty issues have failed because courts decided it was not certain that omitting a capacity assessment made a practical difference. In Mrs Esegbona’s case, the court imposed the fine on the basis that the false imprisonment “may” have made a difference.

The court fined King’s £15,470 for false imprisonment – £150 for each day – as well as £3,500 for the pain and suffering and £5,000 aggravated damages.

A spokesman for the trust said: “On this occasion, we felt it was in the best interests of the patient to remain in our care until a suitable care package could be identified. We do accept that correct procedural steps were not followed for her continuing stay at the hospital.”

I’ll be quoting that at Southampton General in the future, I’m sure and spending any time they try it on anyway preparing a retrospective claim. Might get BB in on the act to help me, with her record!

Mr Nigel Poole QC and I are going to be getting to know each other soon!

Thanks so much for bringing it to my attention Chris.

Your welcome.

'Bout time at least one hospital faced the wrath of a judge ?

It’s taken 8 years to get there and the fine’s trivial, if not downright insulting but if it helps concentrate hospitals’ minds in the future and it’s one more weapon in my armoury. Hopefully, it’ll open the floodgates until they can’t ignore the law any longer.

Funnily enough I came onto the forum yesterday intending to start a thread on coercive control by social workers, especially in hospitals but I got completely sidetracked by catching up on the last few months posts and lost momentum, especially after reading Pet’s awful news.

Of course Southampton General has faced the wrath of a judge (Ashya King) but it doesn’t seem to have changed their attitude problem any. I suspect something sinister going on behind the scenes there. Freemasons perhaps.

Just read about it on Nigel Poole’s blog. Seems it was £130 per day not £150 but also that it wasn’t challenged under the human rights act, only deprivation of liberty because the limit for claims under the human rights act is one year.

Time to get onto our MPs to extend this to at least three years as stressed and/or grieving relatives are in no position to deal with a court case immediately too. But no doubt it suits the hospitals and HM Treasury to know that most potential cases will fail because of the unreasonable time limit.

Absolutely dreadful. Wouldn’t surprise me if the hospital has posters banded about describing its ‘carers charter’ which states how family will be involved in the discharge process.I

Thanks for posting.