“Ensure the toilet door in the section 136 suite at Antelope house is replaced quickly”

Earlier this week, Rich was out and I was home alone. The growing condiment pile felt right and a deep late Autumn sunset beckoned. I grabbed my camera and headed to South Park. I bumped into a few people I knew walking down there. Brief, warm and casual catch ups. Heading off between each with an eye on the sun. Despite knowing from a newly discovered nerdy site sunset was at 6.52pm.

Across the park there were smatterings of students/freshers, young people and others. Being or pounding across the park in serious running strides, sitting, walking, talking, laughing and playing games. Loosely shared eye and phone action on the slowly setting sun.

I dipped down to dandelion level while waiting.

It was quiet and spectacularly beautiful.

Walking home [after the reported 6.52 sunset and 30 minute twilight window] I felt peaceful.

The next day my phone rang. The latest Care Quality Commission inspection of Southern Health (Sloven) was embargoed until Friday. Ah. Ok… Sloven. A Trust with an astonishingly grim back drawer full of failing CQC inspections. A Health Services Journal award winning CEO (2011 from memory) who doshed a mate millions before disappearing with a £250k pay off back in 2016.

Yep.

All that still trips off my ‘you effectively killed my beautiful, beyond loved son’ tongue. And it will continue to do so until I really understand why.

Back in March we naively thought the outcome of the Health and Safety Executive criminal prosecution and £2m fine was a seminal moment in NHS history. A shot across the bow of all Trusts. A judge pulling no punches in his ruling. Generating critical scrutiny across the health and social care provision of this crapshite trust and wider. Good care, ligature points, care plans, medication storage, staff supervision and so much more sorted. These are basics after all.

Reading this latest report generated yet more tears and distress. How low can you continue to go in providing ‘health’ and ‘social care’.

The inspection in June 18 generated a warning notice around the safety of young people in a Southampton based unit. A warning notice around safety.

Five years after our son drowned. [He drowned]

And so many others have died.

The Sloven exec board are still stretching out their entitled legs. Apparently kicking any whiff of a negative inspection report into the long grass. No determination, commitment or even interest in trying to own these continued failings.

Reminding me of those early, baking hot July days. Almost five years to the day swatting away the CQC inspection like they did with LB’s death. [He died]

There were 20 breaches of legal requirements that the trust must put right. We found 74 things that the trust should improve to comply with a minor breach that did not justify regulatory action, to prevent breaching a legal requirement, or to improve service quality

We issued seven requirement notices to the trust. Our action related to breaches of 21 regulations in seven core services.

I dunno. Reading it I jotted so many notes. Bashing on the keyboard. Scratching furious fucking pen to paper. So much so wrong. Still. Beyond wrong.

The trust had not completed the anti-ligature work at Leigh House (identified as needed in previous CQC inspections) which posed a significant risk to young people and was not being adequately mitigated against.

Governance systems did not always provide robust assurance to the trust board about issues within services. For example, we found the board were not cited on staffing issues in some services, low levels of staff supervision, poor compliance with care planning and an inability to provide accurate restraint data. 

And more:

Poorly written and stored care plans; no patient involvement in or knowledge of care plans; poor note keeping; not following the MHA; lack of staff supervision; inappropriate medication management and storage; risks to young people in MH services; lack of hygiene and broken equipment; issues around privacy and gender; safeguarding issues; ward temperature issues; lack of competence in syringe driver training.

The same old and more. Five years on.

Lives tossed out like rubbish. With no consideration. Reputation ruling the roost still..

This sentence strangely leapt out, from the 54 page report.

Ensure the toilet door in the section 136 suite at Antelope house is replaced quickly.

Sort the toilet door. It only takes a few fucking hours.

An inventory of stuff, silence and grubby feet

I’ve gotten into the habit of looking at family photos with a (love drenched) forensic lens. Trying to remember the moment, the meaning of the moment, bits around the moment… the colour, detail, design and detritus. The grubby feet.

Those grubby little feet.

“Plain tops, different coloured plain tops if possible. That’s all,” said the photographer cheerfully in advance of Rich’s surprise 40th birthday photoshoot. We sorted this instruction with plotting and excitement. Magic captured in the glow of the photo. I missed the finer detail at the time and for years. The earthy, organic, dirty detail.

Give me those grubby little feet to hold for just one moment more… please.

I love photos. I’ve always loved photos. Now I examine peeps, objects and stuff in and around photos. Peering beyond, at the outer edges of the image to try to see more.

When someone dies unexpectedly (maybe any time someone dies) you’re left trying to make sense of, and hold on to, stuff desperately. Precariously. Trying to keep the person, not alive because you know they’re not, but real and crystal clear.

This week Rich and I have been home alone. Unusual silence. Quiet silence. He found a (rare) photo of me with Tom as a baby. On a family day out. London Zoo yonks ago.

The memories. The wonder. The logistics. The weather. Stand out moments. Remembering getting home after. Tired, grouchy, overwhelmed kids. Shortcuts and grubby feet.

“Blimey,” I said, looking at the photo. “I can actually remember eating those sarnies…” [Plain. Cheese. No frills. Sliced (by us) cheddar].]

I’d forgotten about the top I was wearing.

“I always liked that top”, said Rich.

“Where did it go?” I wondered.

Crocodile tears and the ‘do nothing’ advice

Early morning, a column by Clare Gerada appeared in my twitter timeline. Gerada is an ex-chair of the Royal College of GPs so no fly by night. She campaigns (as part of a heavily, heavily NHS England funded gig ‘Practitioner Health’) about doctors’ mental health. This week there has been coverage of doctor suicides with some loose reporting of figures (there were 81 suicides not 430*). Gerada is trying to extend the Practitioner Health service beyond London.

I dunno. You can sit on either side of the fence, or on it. As is too often the case with the NHS following the dosh is an instructive exercise.

‘Sensible advice’ say some replies to Gerada’s column. ‘Best advice I’ve ever seen…’

The heading kind of made my eyes water. Those blooming tears. Still.

Do nothing… immediately.’ I can only now imagine this ‘luxury’ over the past five years. There is no space to ‘Do nothing… immediately‘ for families. We face years of unrelenting, unremitting fighting, policing, and uncovering. Pretty much every NHS related scandal is the outcome of persistent, committed and astonishing actions by families and their allies. Activity that allows no downtime in a grief drenched space.

‘Do nothing… immediately’

‘When a complaint lands on your desk…’ says Gerada. Deliberately disembodying the ‘complaint’ from the person making it. And the space in which it materialises.

The person (human) who probably never dreamed of making a ‘complaint’ to the NHS. I mean why would you? Why would any of us**? It’s a national institution. A treasure. Free healthcare at the point of delivery and all that…

How often do we actually make a complaint about stuff? About trains, airlines, education, retail outlets, telecoms, restaurants? Why would any of us want to make an official complaint against the NHS? What would make us feel driven do this? Complaints in any setting are important for improving service. Complaints in the NHS are crucial because they involve lives.

For Gerada the complaint isn’t delivered or received. It ‘lands’ on the workspace. Disconnected from action and intent. Allowing her to (brutally) focus solely on the practitioner.

‘Do nothing’, she advises. ‘If you can, take the rest of the day off.’ Take the rest of the day off…

‘Do not rant and rave…’ I still can’t understand why the assumed position of a medic would be to rant and ‘rave’ about a complaint. Getting a 3/5 mark on student evaluations is enough to cause some right old soul searching/scrutiny of our learning and teaching practice at work (even after 10 years). The idea we would leap straight to defence of our practice – to ranting and raving – is baffling.

‘Wait for the first waves of shock to pass…’ Still no consideration of the person or family who made the complaint. Of what they may be experiencing; their pain, distress, grief. The piece descends into a google translate type extract. Clunky. Missing meaning. Swerving on substance. With the odd hand grenade planted between platitudes: ‘At the earliest opportunity contact your medical defence organisation (even if the complaint is trivial)’.

In short, Gerada’s advice seems to be ignore the substance of the complaint, buggar off for the rest of day and get your legal defence ducks in line. She ends with ‘don’t suffer in silence and don’t take it personally’.

Wow. Just extraordinary ‘advice’.

She has previous on complaining.

And clearly remains obdurate on the subject. A road traffic accident… From last night.

What I don’t understand is why there remains little critical (in a good way) and open questioning of what is clearly shite and offensive advice by medics. It’s as if once harm has happened or been done, the drawbridge is raised and the profession becomes a pack.

Where is the thought, the reflection. Humility. Or challenge?

*This is in no way to dismiss, belittle or otherwise every health professional who has died.

** For the sake of transparency, I made a complaint to Southern Health NHS Trust when LB was in the unit. I said they didn’t listen to my concerns about his care. About 5 days before he drowned in the bath I was told it was not upheld.

A day trip to Cherry Tree and a panel of sense

Landmark judgement yesterday when a tribunal found the CQC decision not to let Care Management Group Limited increase the bedroom numbers in one of their houses, Cherry Tree, from 7-10, fair, reasonable and proportionate. Full details are here and are well worth a grim read. I just wanted to say something about the tribunal panel visit to Cherry Tree (from para 48 in the report). Just as a bit of context, 26 people live on this site (which is called Lilliputs) in different ‘houses’ and it was rated good by the CQC in their last inspection.

Unlike commissioners, regulators, providers, social workers and the like, the panel were just people visiting Cherry Tree. They weren’t wearing those fuggy learning disability goggles that erase any whiff of poor provision. They were human.

This is a taste of what they found.

  • It’s a 7 minute walk along an unlit, tree lined lane to the property. Can you imagine walking for 7 minutes to get from the pavement to your home?
  • The only signage was the care providers name. There was no evidence anyone lived there.
  • The fence was so high and made of wire in places that it resembled a young offenders unit. When the panel queried this they were told it was because one person had a habit of trying to run away. ‘But there’s always a minimum of 1:1 support’, puzzled the panel.
  • No smoking signs were dotted about. ‘This doesn’t happen in people’s homes’, said the panel.
  • Cherry Tree didn’t have a small scale and domestic feel.
  • The site is very isolated with only the occasional dog walker and ‘courting couples’ entering it.
  • The timetable of activities was regimented and there was no interaction between people living in the different houses on site. ‘That’s odd’, pondered the panel. ‘One of the arguments for extending the provision was to allow two young men in Cherry Tree more social interaction’. Staff gave different reasons why this was; compatibility issues/lack of staff training.
  • One of these young men was living in Cherry Tree because he enjoyed rambling. In two years he has not been rambling.

The wondrous Dr Joyce from the CQC clearly explained to the panel

It is not normal to have to live with others in order to enjoy the benefits of relationships/interaction.

No. It bloody well isn’t. The panel said despite the protestations of Care Management Group Limited, the place was both a campus and congregate setting and found in favour of the CQC.

This is a brilliant judgement and shows that the CQC and service provision is heading the right way. What needs sorting now, urgently, is how a CQC inspection could give such dire provision a good rating. And how much this is replicated across the country. Again, it points to fundamental flaws in the inspection process.

On a chilling note, the panel raised this point by Care Management Group Limited (the Appellant):

In what other circumstances would you not aim for “best practice”?

It’s shameful this provider has the arrogance to waste time and money challenging the CQC decision. It’s chilling they were trying to extend warehousing in full view. It’s also shameful that the CEO of this bunch of cowboys, Peter Kinsey, is a Board member of Learning Disability England. If we’re to have any confidence in Learning Disability England, they are going to have to hoof him off the board sharpish. Maybe he could use the extra time sorting out the mess that is Cherry Tree/Lilliputs and start organising some rambling jaunts.

 

The 12 days…

[Written on 16.7.15]

Two years ago today we buried LB.  On a baking hot July day.

He went from being a funny and beyond loved dude to an anonymous inmate in an ATU in the blink of an eye really. Pretty much stripped of his family, everything he understood and recognised, and then his life.

12 days after being found ‘unconscious’ in the bath in the ‘specialist unit’ (that had been taken over by Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust some months earlier), he was buried in a Routemaster bus coffin in a woodland grave. Aged 18 and a half.

I find it hard to think back to that time. Those spaces. The 12 days… The 107 days before. The two years since. Spaces of indescribable pain and horror.

I still remember LB though. Outside of all the shite. I realised this yesterday when I imagined him on holiday with us. I could still see him, hear him and feel his presence strongly. His (constant) commentary, facial expressions, enjoyment, participation and humour. I could see him, sitting cross-legged on the beach, sifting sand through one hand, eyes half closed, basking in the sun like a contented cat.

I wondered about this. On a windswept beach in Tenerife. One of my (many) fears was that I’d forget. That he’d lose shape, substance, being in time. His brutal and unexpected death would obliterate him. But it hasn’t.

What actually happens when your child dies a preventable death in an NHS hospital?

[Written 21.6.15]

After listening to Scott Morrish describe his experiences of what happened after his young son, Sam, died a preventable death in hospital (a depressingly, depressingly familiar account), I thought it might be useful to try to capture and summarise the process. What actually happens:

  1. Your child dies. Unexpectedly. Horrifically. Sometimes brutally.
  2. You are traumatised. Pitched into an unimaginable space of deeply intense pain, shock, horror, disbelief and agony.
  3. Your body expels anything it can physically; vomit, tears, shit, noise.
  4. And, from this point, for a potentially infinite period, you live a life that is, at best grey.
  5. The Trust responsible for the ‘care’ of your child will speedily present a ‘Shame but nothing to see here’ type line. 
  6. There may or may not be talk of an investigation or ‘root cause analysis’.
  7. You will probably start to ask more focused questions.
  8. The response to such questioning can be anything (or shift) from faux assurance that everything possible is being done to get find out what happened, to hostility or simply silence.
  9. The process seems to be continually delayed by the actions of the Trust. They fail to disclose documents or complete versions of documents. You become more concerned and continue to question.
  10. A narrative soon surfaces. You’re the problem. You, with your persistent questioning, your inability to ‘move on’. Your unreasonable actions are causing problems for others, including the staff involved. 
  11. There may be attempts to smear/discredit you through nuanced reframing or positioning of events or explicit blaming.
  12. If the investigation finds that your child’s death was preventable the Trust may apologise (probably publicly if the report is made public). The superficiality of this apology may become apparent when the Trust pitches up to the inquest with barristers and coached staff in an attempt to refute any real responsibility.
  13. The NHS, that cuddly British institution that you’ve grown up with warm fuzzy feelings and respect for, is not your friend when something goes catastrophically wrong.

Wow. Just bleakly bleak. With a load of bleak on top. Despite detailed NHS policy spelling out what to do. At the Clinical Human Factors Group conference that Scott was speaking at, one man told us about his experience after his wife died. The Trust were completely open, took responsibility for what happened and worked with him in investigating her death thoroughly and transparently. He emailed me after and said “I know that my journey was made easier by the commitment and personal philosophy of some staff in the hospital trust.”

So it can be done.

The big question is why does it tend not too?

[Three years on and no answers…]

The courier and the cornet

We now know the internally commissioned external investigation draft report* will arrive by courier on Saturday morning.  It’s good to know exactly when to expect it but this is an enormous thing to wait for.

So enormous, I’m not sure how we deal with it really. Not your usual post that’s for sure. I doubt the courier will have any idea of the importance of what s/he is delivering. Of this carefully crafted set of words relating back to last summer and earlier. To when LB was alive. If I open the door maybe I’ll mention it in passing as I sign the form. Or maybe I’ll hide in bed. Gnawing on my knuckles until it’s all signed for and in the house.  It’s tricky when you don’t have any reference points around ‘reading an investigation report into your child’s death in hospital’.

Then there are the decisions around how to read it. When to read it and where to read it. Rip it open and devour every page on the spot? Carefully make a cup of tea and settle down in a carefully chosen space (chosen on what criteria?) to carefully read these words (when?) that may provide an explanation about how what happened could possibly have happened.

And that’s the biggy of course. We kind of know this already. Having read every written record relating to LB’s care for the last six months and the CQC report. But what if there are other lurking horrors to discover? Nah. Surely not. There can’t be.

But then there’s the uncertainty around the outcome of the investigation. What we’ll do with whatever conclusions (if any) the report comes to. I have no idea. I’ve never seen a report like this. Will it be about LB? Or will it focus on ‘learning outcomes’? Is LB already consigned to the dustbin of ‘a lesson to be learned from’? (Or more likely tied up in the yellow hazardous waste his dirty clothes used to come back from nursery in). Or will the report be about him? Our dude. The legend.

Well there ain’t anything we can do about what’s going to be in the report on Saturday morning at this stage. So I’m thinking the advice from a lovely mate from earlier is probably worth a punt; try and think about it as a necessary step to get through in this process. A step forward. Unbearable but movement.

In that case, we should probably stock up on ice-cream and ginger beer. And have Keane lined up. Ready like old times.

ryan5-38

Garden state

DSCF4483 1

On holiday for two, possibly three, weeks now. Almost on cue after a weekend of NMC agitation, the panel delivered their decision around the impairment of the four nurses still in the ‘game’ at 10am this morning. Day one of annual leave. Week 13 of NMC hearings. Year 6 for the whole shebang.

None of the nurses should have faced serious disciplinary action. More a good old disinfect and reinvigorate with kick ass refresher training to blast away the sour notes of being embroiled in a languishing ‘service’ kicked into the long grass by a greedy and hopelessly inadequate new mistress/trust.

What this process has achieved is to make howlingly visible how unfit for purpose the NMC is. And generate dread, horror and anxiety.

LB’s key nurse (the one the panel inappropriately gushed over) was found ‘not impaired’ and released while the final three were found impaired in some ways. They will be told of their sanctions on Thursday at 10am. Funny how these panels can pinpoint how long something will take in advance. At least they finally discovered the Health and Safety Executive ruling over the weekend [cough cough].

Tom went to work. Rich and I wandered up to Headington Homewares to get something to oil the kitchen table. It’s been battered with over five years of non attention now. We came back and left the new ointment in the tin on the table. I read in the garden. Distracted by the recently shifting (small) terrain. There’s a raised slope in the grass with a 10 inch or so ‘dry stoneish’ type wall thing down the left hand side joining the slope to ground level.

A dip in the grass appeared a few days ago.

DSCF4415

‘Come and have a look, Rich,’ I called when I first noticed it.

He appeared, peered from the back door and said ‘Yep, it’s sunk a bit’.

Today I studied this dip every so often over the top of my book. It’s as if someone has pressed a space hopper down firmly on the slope and caused the low bank to spill out.

I ditched my book and started poking about the spillage with a trowel. Pieces of easily broken, thin, deeply rusted metal appeared just below grass level. I took some in to show Rich and Tom. Nope. No interest. They didn’t even touch them.

After another half arsed attempt at reading, I downloaded a metal detector app. Genius idea. I slowly waved my phone across the parched grass like I’ve seen people do on beaches. Red. Green, red, red.

Tom appeared in the kitchen. I told him about the app.

‘Mum, that’s never going to work’.

It does. Well it does if you get really close to metal. We used a fork to test it. Doubting Tom removed the fork hanging off the back of my phone and I went back to dig a bit more. It was hot work.

Rosie rang. ‘What’s this about you digging up the garden, mum?’

I told her about the app. We laughed and chewed the fat.

I went back to dig.

It’s hard work digging when no one digs with you.

I don’t mind. The mysteries of the past are soothing. And earthy.

The NMC and the fact free determination

This is going to be a detailed post as it’s important to highlight just how shite the NMC panel ‘fact determination’ about the STATT nurses is. This is about the hearing process rather than what the nurses did and didn’t do.

As background context feast your eyes on this:

Maintaining public confidence and proper professional standards is a bit of a stretch given the almost fact free determination. Instead, the 66 page document contains unsubstantiated assertions, conjecture and an erasing of evidence from previous hearings. I’ll present a few examples here to give a mcwhiffy flavour of the whole thing. The six nurses are referred to as Colleagues A-F.

Batting for the nurses

The bias throughout the document is quite simply breathtaking. Here’s the description of one nurse. The same nurse who refused to answer a question at LB’s inquest on the basis of self-incrimination (evoking Rule 22).

The panel fall over themselves in a smorgasbord of judgement and conjecture which makes ‘the dog ate my homework’ seem a reasonable excuse. The extent of this bias is beautifully captured in the following extract.

The expert witness clearly states a risk assessment should have been done and patients with epilepsy should be within physical reach at all times. This reiterates the expert witness evidence from LB’s inquest and the GMC hearing. The panel attempt to bury this unassailable evidence in a set of absurd and discrediting sentences. Under some pressure… declined to express a view… She could not say…

How can she say what the outcome of an assessment might have been when it wasn’t done? Putting her ‘under some pressure’ is also a chilling comment.

A very partial engagement with ‘evidence’

The pesky facts that get in the way of the chosen panel narrative are ignored or buried as we saw above. They argue at length that the nurses could not have known LB was having seizures in the unit. That I told them LB had a seizure in May is erased. The fact [this is a fact] that I emailed the unit three days before LB died to say I was concerned he had been drowsy at the weekend is dismissed using evidence from the CTM notes.

This handily ignores the RIO notes where staff reported LB was subdued and red-eyed over that weekend [more facts]. A few paragraphs later the RIO notes are used as (quote) ‘positive evidence’ to show that a nurse made a verruca care plan for LB. The determination (see what I did there) of the panel to rule out any whiff that the nurses should have done anything differently because LB’s epilepsy was ‘well controlled’ is undermined by the fact [yep, another one] that they all knew he had had a seizure in January. Just a few months earlier. This document is more about annihilating actual facts than determining them.

The old language giveaway

There is a littering of language which demonstrates the lack of panel objectivity. I don’t know if this is typical of an NMC panel determination but sweet baby cheesus I hope not. Tom has been an employee at Yellow Submarine for 8 months now and his work involves writing reports. He knows you have to be objective with the language you use. A quick google shows the panel chair has been doing the job for way more than eight months (and I suspect is considerably older than 19) so I can only assume using words like ‘unsurprisingly’ must be commonplace among NMC panel determinations.

A further example can be seen in the following two paragraphs.

The first sentence is again absurd. How could there be evidence of something that didn’t happen? Then there is an emphatic ‘precisely’ underlining apparent good nursing practice. This is followed with a mealy mouthed ‘may have been incorrect’ in the second paragraph which makes me want to gouge my eyes out it’s so deeply offensive. It was incorrect. That’s why LB is fucking dead. [Howl]

Blame, blame and more blame

Blame rears its ugly head again. Particularly hideous given the judgement in the HSE criminal prosecution stated there.was.nothing.more.we.could.have.done. Blaming us again is astonishingly cruel.

Without any apparent reflection the panel say that “the undisputed evidence before the panel is that it could be very difficult to engage with Patient 1″. Undisputed evidence. Just a quick reminder that these nurses are specialist learning disability nurses. All they could get was ‘a grunt and a nod’

‘It would appear’ appears throughout the document in defence of the nurses. In the following extract ‘it would appear there was limited additional information that could otherwise have been sought from the family’. How can they possibly make this judgement? One bit of evidence (that destroyed part of my already savaged heart) underlined how little understanding the panel (and nursing staff) had of LB:

In his oral evidence, Colleague B confirmed Patient 1’s fear of gangs of youths and his reluctance to go out alone.

He didn’t go out alone. He never had. This is a pretty substantial piece of information the nurses were missing.

We though (‘they’ ‘they’ ‘they’) could have/should have done more.

We visited too much (‘virtually every day’) and there is a juicy third hand suggestion that I was so difficult the unit had to introduce a telephone triage system to cope with me.

Venturing further into the realms of the absurd

The final example takes absurdity to a new level. Yep. It is possible.

One charge was that the nurses didn’t make a planned referral to the epilepsy nurse. It turns out the person they all thought was the epilepsy nurse (Miss 12), wasn’t. [I know]. With a palpable flourish, the panel dismiss the charge. There was no epilepsy nurse to refer to. Do you hear me? And this is a fact. A fact I tell you. The over-use of the word ‘fact’ in this paragraph kind of suggests the panel know they are on flaky ground.

I can almost sense weariness from Mr Hoskins (who I assume is the NMC barrister). Such twisted, twisted logic.

I got as far as p18/66 with this analysis. It continues in the same vein. Grim, biased, childish nonsense. I’m sickened that this could be considered to be of ‘proper professional standards’ in any way shape or form. When you add in the fact [yep] this has taken five years and during the interminable process the NMC shared our personal details with all six nurses and their counsels twice, it’s very clear this body ain’t fit for purpose.

Sharks on the rooftops

I went for a wander round Headington late afternoon earlier. In part to practice taking photos with my new camera and because I remain so blooming upset/agitated by the description of LB in the NMC hearing ‘determination of (un)facts’. How dare a fucking ‘panel’ of a nurse and two lay people who never met LB and have done nothing to try to understand anything about him be so callously disrespectful of who he was.

No doubt they will argue their determination is based on evidence but evidence is not statements like so and so ‘seems to suggest that…’

Distressing, unnecessary and cruel.

In the late afternoon sun I wandered past the Co-op where LB smashed doing the shopping back in the day. Still makes me chuckle. On to Posh Fish, a go-to chippy for 20 years though our visits have dropped to rarely as the kids have grown older. My mum and dad took Rosie, Tom and LB there for some nosh on the day of my viva at Warwick in 2006. Rich and I pitched up later to have a celebratory beer with them. Such a joyful day. Posh Fish rocked. Reach for the stars stuff it seemed at the time.

Sharks on the rooftops.

Then round to the other Headington shark. The one we used to go and look at when the kids were tots. Rosie was convinced for years it had been a fish and chip shop. I think maybe as a way of trying to make sense of an enormous shark apparently falling head first from the sky through the roof of a terraced house.

At the end of the shark road is the funeral home LB was in before his funeral. Well in and out of because of the balls up over his post mortem. Behind the side window is the ‘viewing room’ or chapel of rest. It’s just a room really but a room completely and devastatingly not like any other room.

[For geography nerds, the John Radcliffe Hospital is up the road there on the left.]

As I waited to cross the road directly opposite a coach went passed blocking my view. Oh my…

Angel Executive Travel. No.fucking.way.

This coach passed me on the day of LB’s funeral. Walking in distress and agitation in the park across the road (the same road). A different type/flavour/density? of distress and agitation.

I didn’t know whether to laugh, cry or punch the air.

I’m taking air punching.

At the end of a week in which professional sharks (not our local fun and quirky ones) have once again been circling for blood and behaving like fucking spunktrumpetweeblewarblers we’re not going to let LB’s memory be sullied in a crass, ill-informed and deeply biased report.

On Friday we’re back to London to fight the fucking fight that never, ever seems to end; to try to establish the humanity of our fun, quirky and beautiful children.