Lousia Ovington independent investigation report ... - NHS North East
Lousia Ovington independent investigation report ... - NHS North East
Lousia Ovington independent investigation report ... - NHS North East
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
CHAPTER 9 – CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS<br />
146<br />
and subsequently for the assessment for psychological work to take place, as any<br />
motivation she had for doing the work appears to have been lost during the<br />
intervening period.<br />
• Recommendation 21. Trusts should review the provision and availability<br />
of “talking therapies”, including dialectic behavioural therapy in the trust<br />
area and encourage clinicians to actively consider whether the needs of a<br />
patient should be addressed by psychotherapy or psychology. This is<br />
particularly important where a patient (such as Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>) has<br />
suffered some form of extreme childhood trauma.<br />
g) Referral procedures<br />
The panel noted that on a number of occasions there was confusion about how<br />
referrals to services should, or could be made.<br />
Examples were:<br />
i. In April 2001, Social Worker 4 was attempting to get psychological support for<br />
Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>. It appeared to the panel remarkably difficult for him to get<br />
someone to refer her, as he kept being advised to discuss the matter with<br />
different people. It was unclear why he could not refer her to the psychology<br />
department himself. The referral to Psychotherapist 1 was finally done by<br />
Consultant 5 in July 2001. 98<br />
ii. At around the same time, Social Worker 4 was trying to get Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong><br />
referred to CPN services, which should have been done after her discharge from<br />
Darlington Memorial Hospital in February 2001. He seemed to be unable to<br />
effect this referral and again, the panel was unclear about why. 99<br />
iii. In early 2002 there was no clarity at all about who was responsible for<br />
overseeing Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>’s psychiatric care. Social Worker 4 was attempting to<br />
find out about her current mental health. After several calls, first to Consultant<br />
14 (who he was informed had left several months earlier) and then to Consultant<br />
13, to no effect, he was told by Consultant 13’s secretary that if he wished to<br />
access Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>’s outpatient records, he should ask the GP to get hold of<br />
them.<br />
iv. On 10 June 2004 the emergency duty social worker received a referral from<br />
Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>’s landlady about Louisa <strong>Ovington</strong>’s extremely disturbed<br />
behaviour. The social worker rang the GP, who told her to contact the CRT, who<br />
refused to take a referral from the social worker, as it ‘needed to come from a<br />
98 Chapter 1 paragraph 126<br />
99 Chapter 1 paragraph 118