Psychiatric evidence in failure to follow up claims
Independent psychiatric opinion where a patient was not monitored, reviewed or followed up as they should have been and their mental health deteriorated, for claimant, defendant and single joint expert instructions. Free initial screening call and fixed fees with no hidden charges.
- Section 12(2) approved
- Claimant, defendant and SJE
- Judged without hindsight
When the follow-up did not happen
Some claims turn on what did not happen: a review that was never booked, a blood test not done or not acted on, a referral that was lost, or a patient who missed appointments and was discharged without anyone asking why. Dr Pradhan assesses whether the monitoring and follow-up of a patient’s mental health and psychiatric medication met the standard of the time, and what difference proper follow-up would probably have made.
Inadequate follow-up after a crisis presentation and failures in monitoring are among the issues she commonly assesses. The report builds a timeline of the contacts that should have happened and those that did.
Dr Pradhan is section 12(2) approved and dual-accredited for claimant and defendant work.
Failures commonly reviewed
Monitoring and follow-up claims commonly involve:
- Follow-up after discharge from a mental health ward
- Follow-up after self-harm or a crisis presentation
- Referrals lost, delayed or not acted on
- Missed appointments and discharge for non-attendance
- Lithium and other blood tests not done or not acted on
- Physical health checks for antipsychotic medication
- Review after a change of medication or dose
- Warning signs reported by the family
- Letters between hospital, community team and GP
- Care plans that were not carried out
- The psychiatric harm that followed, and its prognosis
- Joint statements, supplementary questions and second opinions
Send a short chronology of the contacts, the allegations and the relevant dates, and Dr Pradhan will say whether the issues fall within her expertise and, if they do, confirm a fixed fee.
Submit an enquiryWhat a follow-up claim has to show
The report deals with each of these, from the records and the guidance in force at the time:
- What monitoring or follow-up did reasonable psychiatric practice require, and when?
- What would it probably have found, and what would the clinicians probably have done?
- Would that probably have prevented the deterioration, or made it less severe?
What a timely contact would have found is usually the most disputed point. The report sets out what the records show about the patient’s state at the time, and how a timely contact would probably have changed what followed.
Submit an enquiryGuidance and the standard of care
National guidance sets out how people should be followed up after leaving a mental health ward or presenting with self-harm, including how soon contact should be made after discharge, sooner where a risk of suicide has been identified, and how psychiatric medicines should be monitored. NICE guidance covers England, and the devolved governments decide how it applies in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Guidance informs the standard of care but does not fix it: the question remains whether the care was within the range of reasonable psychiatric practice at the time.
Where a trust’s own policy set a timescale or a process, the report considers whether it was followed and whether any departure made a difference. For claims in England and Wales the report is structured for CPR Part 35; reports for Scotland and Northern Ireland are prepared to the requirements of those courts.
Where a doctor failed to attend a patient, causation depended on what would have happened if she had attended: what she would have done, and whether failing to do more would itself have been negligent.
Related pages
Monitoring and follow-up questions
If your question is not answered here, call and Dr Pradhan will advise on scope and timescale.
Call 0121 752 6065The patient missed appointments and was discharged. Can that be negligent?
It can be, depending on what was known about the patient’s risk and on the service’s policy. The report considers the attempts made to contact them and whether discharge was a reasonable decision at the time.
The family reported warning signs that were not acted on. Is that within scope?
Yes. The report considers what the family reported, how it was recorded and what a reasonable response would have been.
Does Dr Pradhan comment on GP follow-up?
Where the follow-up was the GP’s responsibility, the standard is for a GP expert. Dr Pradhan addresses the psychiatric aspects, including what a timely review would probably have found, and the consequences.
Is an assessment of the claimant needed?
Usually, for the harm and the prognosis. A breach-only opinion on the monitoring and follow-up can often be given from the records.
How long does a report take?
It depends on the volume of records. The timescale is confirmed at the outset, once the records and the allegations have been seen. Condition and prognosis reports are usually ready 1–2 weeks from assessment.
Instruct Dr Pradhan on a follow-up claim
Send a short chronology of the contacts, the allegations, the funding route and any limitation or hearing dates.
- Phone0121 752 6065
- Emailinfo@
doctorpradhan.co.uk - Consulting Rooms NationwideAbacus Court, Harborne, Birmingham B17 0HH
Please do not include medical records or a detailed personal history in this form. Dr Pradhan will confirm how to send the papers once the instruction is agreed.
Case enquiry
Fields marked * are required.
Instructions are accepted from solicitors only. Read our privacy policy before sending personal information.
If the matter is urgent, call 0121 752 6065.