Council fined £37,000 for killer drug blunder

[bongme]

hi

11th March Monday 2002

Manchester online News

A COUNCIL has been fined £37,000 and will have to pay compensation to two young people in its care who were given drugs which triggered seizures and could have killed them.

Magistrates heard that the two residents in a Stockport council sheltered home were given a strong anti-psychotic drug intended for another resident on three occasions in less than a month.

The court heard that on one occasion a casual worker had been left in charge of administering the drugs.

Chairman of the bench, Peter Maher, said: ‘‘I would not want casual workers administering Dolly Mixtures, never mind drugs.

‘‘This is case of ‘There by the grace of God go I’. We could have had a funeral.’’

The two young victims, Alison Palmer and David McGregor, both in their 20s, suffer from severe learning difficulties.

They should have been given drugs to control their epilepsy, but instead they were given the anti-psychotic Clozapine, intended for one of the two other residents at the home in Hazel Grove.

Compensation

Both required hospital treatment after each incident. The court ordered that they should receive a total of £750 compensation.

Elaine Harbour, prosecuting for the Health and Safety Executive, told the Stockport court that Clozapine puts patients at risk of epileptic fits and can cause liver failure.

Alison Palmer suffered fits after she was given Clozapine on two occasions.

On the second occasion she spent five days in hospital recovering. David McGregor suffered slurred speech and had his first epileptic fit in seven years. On one of the occasions a casual worker had been left in charge of administering the drugs.

Mrs Harbour outlined a catalogue of management failure, poor procedures and poor training which she said led to the incidents.

Stockport council pleaded guilty to three charges relating to the administration of medicines and two charges of failing to report the incidents within the legal time limit.

Defending the council, barrister Catherine Foster said the mistakes at the home were a ‘coincidence’ and caused by ‘incompetent staff’.

‘‘These are professional workers, intelligent workers being asked to undertake a straightforward task,’’ she said. ‘‘Prior to this, the council did not have any reason to believe its staff were incompetent.’’

A council spokesman said it had apologised to the victims, and new procedures have now been put in place.

Bongme