Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Western Isles NHS Board

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 201705029 Sector Health Category communication / staff attitude / dignity / confidentiality Decided 01 August 2018

View NHS Western Isles scorecard

Full decision

Summary

A firm of solicitors (Firm C), raised a complaint on behalf of their client (Mrs A) that, during an examination under anaesthetic, a consultant had carried out a rectal examination without her knowledge or consent. She only found out about this when she received a copy of her medical records. When Firm C raised concerns about this with the board, they passed the correspondence to the consultant (who no longer worked for the board), who responded to Mrs A directly. The board subsequently accepted the consultant's response as their response to the complaint and did not investigate the complaint through their complaints handling procedure.

We took independent advice from a consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology (the medical specialty that deals with pregnancy, childbirth, and the post-partum period and the health of the female reproductive systems and the breasts). We found that it was not routine practice to perform a rectal examination as part of the examination Mrs A was having conducted. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidance on Obtaining Valid Consent states that procedures should not fall out-with that which the patient consented to, unless there is an unanticipated emergency. We found that Mrs A should have been aware that a rectal examination was a possibility prior to the procedure and consented as such. In the absence of consent, it was not reasonable for a rectal examination to be carried out. We upheld the complaint.

We also had concerns about the way in which Firm C's concerns had been handled. Firm C had clearly raised a complaint and our view was that the board should have investigated and responded to this in line with their complaints handling procedure. We made recommendations regarding this.

Recommendations

What we asked the organisation to do in this case: Apologise to Mrs A for conducting a rectal examination on her without her knowledge or consent and for failing to consider her complaint through the complaints handling procedure. The apology should meet the standards set out in the SPSO guidelines on apology available at https://www.spso.org.uk/leaflets-and-guidance.

What we said should change to put things right in future: Ensure that clinical staff in the Obstetrics and Gynaecology department are aware of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists guidance on Obtaining Valid Consent.

Consideration should be given to a discussion about consent at the departmental induction for doctors and/or a training session.

In relation to complaints handling, we recommended: Complaints handling staff should be aware of the board's complaints handling procedure and how to recognise a complaint.

We have asked the organisation to provide us with evidence that they have implemented the recommendations we have made on this case by the deadline we set.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201705029 as a PDF (14.83 KB) Updated: December 2, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Western Isles NHS Board

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202300806 01 Apr 2025 C complained about the standard of surgery and post-operative care that they received when they had an elective operation for … Partly Upheld
202106315 01 Jul 2024 C, an advocacy worker, complained on behalf of the family of A, about a failure to appropriately investigate A’s symptoms, … Upheld
202209846 01 Apr 2024 C complained about the care and treatment that they received from the community mental health team, after C was referred … Upheld
202103246 01 Nov 2023 C complained about the board's decision not to fund the travel and accommodation costs they and their spouse had incurred … Upheld
202104143 01 Jul 2023 C engaged with the board’s mental health services and believed that they had received a diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder … Not Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation