Activities co-ordinator took mental health patients out without risk assessments

Tuesday 30 January 2024

An activities co-ordinator who took patients out of a mental health facility without risk assessments – one of whom later injured a police officer during a search effort – was not unfairly dismissed, the Employment Tribunal has ruled.

Dismissing a claim for unfair and wrongful dismissal, the Tribunal found that Jeanette Mash had been specifically told not to remove patients from Orchard House after an episode where a patient had then absconded, leading to a search in order to return them to the facility during which a police officer was injured.

Deputy Chair Advocate Ian Jones said that while Ms Mash has said that "one of the reasons she was pursuing her claim was because someone had to shine the proverbial light on the problems in Jersey with the provision of care for those with mental health difficulties", there was no evidence of any systematic failings, and that that claim was anyway of little relevance to her case.

The Tribunal heard that Ms Mash had taken patients out of Orchard House in March 2022, trying again on 20 September that year when she was prevented by a senior staff nurse who advised her that patients needed to be risk assessed before they could be allowed to leave.

A day later she removed three patients, two of whom were detained under mental health legislation and the third subject to a "significant restriction of liberty order".

It was one of these patients who was involved in the injury of the police officer.

The incident resulted in an instruction from the Acting Ward Manager not to remove any further patients, a direction repeated at a supervision meeting the same day.

However, on 3 October, a further patient was removed with Ms Mash later responding to questions about the incident with the words: "I kind of forgot".

The following day she was issued with a letter of suspension and, after an investigation, summarily dismissed.

Reviewing the evidence, Advocate Jones said that while it was possible that Ms Mash had not initially been entirely clear as to the "dos and don'ts of taking patients out", all possible ambiguity was removed when she was told unequivocally not to take patients out.

He said: "In my view it was self-evidently reasonable for the [SEB] to view the conduct of Ms Mash to be capable of amounting to gross misconduct.

"It is also correct to note that [it] formed this view after a comprehensive investigation and then a disciplinary hearing prior to making a final decision.

"Having considered all of the evidence and for the reasons as set out herein, I have very little hesitation in finding in favour of [the SEB].

"In my judgment [it] was not only entitled to but also correct to dismiss Ms Mash, summarily and without notice, in the circumstances as I have found them to be.

"I accordingly dismiss Ms Mash’s claims."