A practice in the Stratford-on-Avon area

3. Ms S complains on 5 June 2025, the Surgery did not respond correctly to information Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) gave to them, after DWP received information about her daughter, K’s welfare.

4. Specifically, Ms S says because the Surgery did not contact K’s father, the Surgery incorrectly made a safeguarding referral for K.

5. She told us this caused irreparable damage to her trust and confidence in the Surgery, leading to her seeking medication from an online pharmacy. She says her emotional difficulties have worsened the safeguarding referral led to unnecessary personal information about her being shared with Children’s Services. She told us she had to leave work, was unable to return to her career, and has significant unaddressed debt.

6. Ms S is seeking a financial remedy.

7. In June 2025, the Surgery raised a safeguarding referral to Children’s Services for Ms S’ daughter, K. This Surgery made the referral following contact from DWP.

8. DWP told the Surgery Ms S was an inpatient at a private rehabilitation centre. It also told the Surgery Ms S was undergoing treatment for drug addiction and ongoing mental health problems.

9. Ms S told us she was not seeking treatment for drug addiction. We understand this and it is not part of our investigation.

10. K’s medical records showed she was living with Ms S at Ms S’ home address. The Surgery were concerned about K’s welfare and raised the safeguarding referral.

the Surgery did not respond correctly to information DWP provided about her daughter’s welfare.

13. Before we decide if we should conduct a detailed investigation of a complaint, we look at whether there are signs the organisation has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened with what did happen. We have done this and have not found any indications that something has gone wrong.

14. Ms S told us she received a telephone call from K’s father on 10 June. He told her Children’s Services had contacted him about a safeguarding referral concerning K. He said the Surgery had made the referral about K, on 5 June.

15. Ms S said she was an inpatient at a private rehabilitation centre on 5 June. She said the admission was self-referred and followed several years of mental health problems. She was receiving treatment for her chronic depression.

16. Ms S believes if the Surgery had had contacted K’s father before making the referral, he could have explained the situation and prevented a safeguarding referral being made.

17. We understand was upsetting for Ms S and continues to have an impact on her.

18. The Surgery was contacted by DWP on 29 May.

19. The Surgery said it made the safeguarding referral after it received an email from DWP saying Ms S was an inpatient in a rehabilitation centre. It said it had not previously been made aware she was receiving inpatient treatment. It did not know K was living with her father.

20. It said it made the referral on the advice of its safeguarding lead, in accordance with its safeguarding policy, and in line with GMC guidance.

21. At the time of the safeguarding referral, K’s medical records showed she lived with Ms S at Ms S’ home address in her sole care. K’s medical records also showed Ms S as the only contact for her daughter.

22. The Surgery’s safeguarding policy says if a child is thought to be at risk of harm, the multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH) must be contacted.

23. DWP had informed the Surgery Ms S was not living at home. As there were no further contact details on K’s patient records, the Surgery raised a safeguarding concern in K’s best interests. This was in line with its safeguarding responsibilities.

24. GMC guidance says ‘All children and young people have a right to be protected from abuse and neglect – all medical professionals have a duty to act on any concerns they have about the safety or welfare of a child or young person’. The referral also followed GMC guidance.

25. We recognise this situation has caused Ms S a great deal of distress. We understand she has told us this impacted her mental health.

26. We believe the Surgery would not have been able to contact K’s father as it had no details for him on K’s medical records. For this reason, it raised a safeguarding concern. Based on the evidence we have seen, we are satisfied the Surgery acted in line with its safeguarding policy and GMC guidance. We will not investigate this further.

27. We are sorry to learn of Ms S’ complaint. We hope our explanation provides her with the reassurance we considered and investigated her complaint thoroughly before arriving at our decision.

1. We have carefully considered Ms S’ complaint about the Surgery. We were very sorry to hear about her experiences. It was clearly a difficult time for her. We understand she is still struggling with the effects of the events.

2. Having considered the case in detail we have decided we have seen no indication anything went seriously wrong.