Skip to content

Elise Sebastian

Evidence boundary. This page is a structured project extraction from the linked primary Prevention of Future Deaths source. It is not the report text. Do not infer cause, prevalence or product-wide performance beyond the source and the explicit qualification below.

Open the primary Judiciary source · Source register: SRC-192 · Return to all included reports · Open the case–mechanism/evidence map

Report metadata

Field Value
PFD reference 2026-0078
Registered primary source SRC-192
Report date 2026-02-08
Coroner area Essex
Clinical setting Child and adolescent mental-health inpatient care
Care transition Therapeutic observation and medication plan to ward care and post-death review
Primary workflow group Triage, observations and decision support
Primary browsing context Mental health care
Predominant information boundary Within a care setting

The workflow, browsing-context and predominant-boundary fields are retained navigation aids. They are not additional coronial findings, and a single primary value cannot express every aspect of a multi-setting or multi-mechanism report.

Care-pathway classification

This classification distinguishes where safety-relevant information or work arose, where action was expected and where the digital or information workflow failed. It is a project coding of the source, not a coronial statement. “Origin” does not mean the organisation caused the harm.

Dimension Project classification
Settings and pathway participants Inpatient or secure mental-health care
Information or work-item origin Inpatient or secure mental-health care
Origin care context(s) Secondary care
Expected action destination Inpatient or secure mental-health care
Destination care context(s) Secondary care
Directional pathway Inpatient or secure mental-health care → Inpatient or secure mental-health care
Care-setting span One care setting
Sector boundary Health services only
Failure point Multiple points
Classification confidence high

Classification note: Monitoring, documentation, medication and audit failures were distributed across functions within one inpatient mental-health setting.

Classification confidence applies only to this care-pathway coding. It is separate from extraction confidence, source authority and causal certainty.

Evidence status and qualification

Field Status
Extraction confidence high
Verification status Primary source linked; high-confidence extraction
Response evidence status Response evidence noted
Registered response sources SRC-237
Non-exclusive mechanism codes LOOP, GOV, HF, ALERT, PROV, RES

Qualification recorded in the dataset: The jury found observation failures and neglect contributed to death; the report contains numerous staffing, environmental, medication and governance factors, so no single technology is treated as the sole cause

“Response evidence noted” means only that the row qualification refers to response/respondent evidence or records a recipient's post-report position. The linked IDs enumerate the official response attachments registered for this row; they do not imply that every response supports every part of the qualification, and they do not establish implementation. “Not assessed” makes no claim about whether a response exists.

Structured project extraction

These fields are analytical summaries, not quotations.

Project summary of the coroner's concern

Technology rollout, record integrity, training and oversight failures remained capable of exposing highly vulnerable patients to fatal risk

Requested action

Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust to address the identified observation, system, record-integrity and governance failures

Digital safety characterisation

Dimension Project extraction
System or record type Oxevision, ward Wi-Fi, Datix and medication and observation records
Digital function Observation monitoring, incident reporting, medicines documentation and audit
Failure mode Oxevision and Wi-Fi did not work reliably, interim safeguards and Datix reports failed, medication changes were omitted and observation records were falsified or inconsistent
Human-factors issue Unworkable observation workload, incomplete training and unreliable alerts encouraged unsafe workarounds and inaccurate recording
Workflow issue Project oversight did not reconcile known connectivity faults, missing Datix reports, monitor coverage, medication charts or observation evidence
Information issue Live monitoring, incident state, medication and recorded observations did not form a trustworthy or complete safety picture

Downstream Defence trace

No canonical candidate Defence requirement currently cites this report. This does not imply that the mechanism is irrelevant; any mapping must be added and qualified in the controlled requirements register.

The included-case dataset preserves early legacy_military_relevance and legacy_derived_requirement fields for audit history. They are not published here as requirements and must not override the canonical REQ register. New report rows do not need to populate them.