Wednesday, 28 May 2014

What Do NHS Tayside Have To Hide?

NHS Tayside do not seem to be aware of the new policy of honesty and transparency. The only thing I have had from them is cover-ups and lies. Leading to the death of my sister at the age of 51. 

She had been a patient in the Carsview LDAU in Dundee, part of Ninewells Hospital. I became concerned about her physical decline and continually pointed out what, to me, were worrying symptoms. This continued until she was so phisically unwell that she was moved to the clinical investigation unit where she was diagnosed with pancytopenia (bone marrow failure). The 7 antipsychotics and two sleeping pills as well as other medication which they still won't tell what they were, were thought to be the cause so, she was taken off of them. After this her mental health improved so much that the doctor expressed his surprise at her death as in his words "it was the best I have seen her". 

The lies began after a power of attorney who had broken all of the rules, was acting outwith her remit and without the necessary certification, was allowed to take up welfare rights after having had no contact for 7 years.

The Lies

  • As Carole's next of kin I was excluded from her care due to the fact that the attorney lied and said that I had stolen money from my sisters bank account. Giving them the opportunity to ignore the advice I was giving them regarding her medication. Despite being proved correct each time something went wrong I was told by Carole's doctor that he would not help a thief. I had been proved innocent twice by this time.
  • in Jan 2011 Carole was fit for release but I was told that as I only had one bedroom, that would not be possible. I lived in a two bedroom flat. That response was later retracted and replaced by, the doctor consulted with the relevant people involved in Carole's care and they had decided it was better to keep her in a secure unit than let her stay with the sister who had been looking after her for 7 years. This led to her being medicated for her grief after learning of our mothers death. From that point on Carole was kept in an almost comatose state.
  • I kept asking her psychiatrist to seek medical attention as I was convinced that something was really wrong. Carole was turning a funny shade, sort of a blue/green, she had become disorientated and was always falling over, her speech was really slurred and she could not hold her head up. I was told that she was fine and was being well administered to. I learned after her death that she was being administered to by more psychiatrists or so her psychiatrist says, but, when I asked the complaints and advice team for the names of the other doctors involved in Carole's care I was told that there was only one.
  • Carole was told that she was not allowed in to the meetings regarding her future care, when I questioned this I was told the her attorney was acting on her behalf and Carole did not need to be there. This was the same attorney who has now been proven to have been acting illegally. Carole got no choice, the desisions were made, she was then brought in to be told what they thought would be best for her, regardless of her last known wishes.
  • The doctor, social worker and attorney lied when they said that they were looking to rehome Carole in Rose Lodge. It had already been established that this type of accomodation was completely unsuitable for Carole. She needed a single supported accomodation. Therefore this was simply a ruse to satisfy me that they were trying to get her out of the hospital.
  • I was rarely invited to attend the meetings, the ones I did attend were mainly beacause Carole had told me they were having one so I would just turn up. Strangely though all the decisions that went against my advice were made at meetings that I was told were closed meetings, yet the illegal attorney was allowed to attend.
The Questions

  • Why was the attorney allowed to act without the certificates she needed to do so?
  • Why was Carole's attorney allowed to make all the decisions regarding her future care despite the law saying that every effort should be made to ensure that the persons wishes were being followed?
  • Why keep her heavily sedated, what benefit was expected?
  • Why so many antipsychotics when they were aware that Carole already had chronic liver and kidney disease?
  • Why refuse to let Carole come home with me despite her saying she wanted to stay with me?
  • Why was medical attention not sought after I continually expressed my concern?
  • Why didn't her doctor know that Carole was on a three monthly injection to prevent her from having periods?
  • Why when Carole had been diagnosed with pancytopenia and lithium toxicity were these ignored in favour of sepsis?
  • Why lie and say that were were trying to rehome her in a place that they knew to be unsuitable?
  • Why not let her grieve for our mother instead of medicating her into a trance like state.
  • Why continue to call me a thief despite having been proved innocent twice?
  • Why was her medication not reduced or changed when it became obvious that it was having a detrimental effect on her?
  • Why, whe each time I was proved correct about horrendous side effects was my advice continually ignored?
  • I asked the last doctor who treated her, "you said that in your opinion" You believed that Carole had been over medicated. Do you stand by this?
  • Why still refuse to invite me to meetings even after Carole said she wanted me there?
  • When was Carole last tested for lithium levels before her admission to the CIU?
The above questions remain unanswered. I believe that the drugs and the prolonged incarceration contributed to Carole's death. She had been diagnosed with bone marrow failure, she also suffered kidney failure due to lithium therapy, then she got sepsis bought on by an infected line. This information was all taken from her death certificate. Because the sepsis took over this is now allowing the hospital to say that her death was not drug related. I believe it is all related to her death.

  • If I had been allowed to take her home she would not have been drugged up so much that she would sleep all day and then need to be given two sleepung pills at night.
  • I would have allowed her to grieve for our mother and not added more medication to her regime. The medication that I warned would cause horrendous side effects.
  • I would have taken her to the doctor and had her symptoms looked into. If that had happened Carole would have got treatment far sooner than she did and her immune system would not have plummeted so low that she could not fight off the infection.
  • If they had checked their information and approached the court for direction like I asked on numerous occaisions, I believe the whole outcome would have been completely different.
Please sign the petition to stop them from being able to do this to anyone else. Carol'e was not an isolated case in fact the year she died there were 78 other sudden and unexpected deaths in Scottish hospitals alone. That figure rose to 177 the following year. Help me stop it now. Call For A Change To The Mental Health Laws Thank you.