NHS staff under investigation after teen’s medical records accessed by staff years after death

A hospital has launched a probe into NHS staff after it emerged that the medical records of an 18-year-old were accessed years after his death.

Oliver McGowan, who was autistic and had epilepsy, died in November 2016 after doctors at Southmead hospital, Bristol, gave him an antipsychotic medication, despite medical records showing he had an intolerance to antipsychotic drugs.

Shortly after, he had a rare reaction, developed severe brain swelling and died weeks later. An inquest into his death found the medication was appropriately prescribed but a 2020 independent review commissioned by the NHS found his death was “potentially avoidable”.

After years of campaigning by Oliver’s parents, Paula and Tom, new legislation was introduced in November 2022 to ensure all NHS staff have mandatory training for caring for patients with autism and learning disabilities in hospital.

Now, a decade after his death, his parents have revealed that Oliver’s medical records have been accessed hundreds of times by staff and, on at least one occasion, inappropriately by a doctor earlier this year.

More than a dozen NHS workers are now being investigated by Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, which runs the hospital, including 16 who are not employed by the trust and four who are, according to emails seen by The Independent.

One doctor, who is no longer an employee of the trust, accessed his records in March 2026 without a legitimate reason and referred themselves to the General Medical Council.

Speaking to The Independent, Ms McGowan described the revelations as a “violation”.

“Oliver was failed horrifically. The treatment he received led to his death,” she said.

“I think people have forgotten that he's a person. He was a young teenager, and he was treated like dirt, as if he's a commodity, as if people have the right to just access and delve and nose.

“It calls into question how these people value Oliver as a person, his privacy. Does Oliver not matter? Do they not care? It's a violation of his privacy.”

The NHS has been at the centre of several recent incidents where staff have been found to have snooped on patients’ records inappropriately, most recently in the cases of the victims of the Southport and Nottingham Killings and the three-year-old from Cambridge who fell into the crocodile pit.

A former healthcare worker also received a caution from the Information Commissioner’s Office for attempting to obtain and sell the medical records belonging to the Princess of Wales.

In July, NHS England chief executive Sir Jim Mackey said any unauthorised staff member who views patient medical records would face dismissal after he described the action as a "disgraceful breach of patient trust and against the law".

Bristol NHS Foundation Trust launched a probe after a subject access request from Mr and Mrs McGowan revealed 38 staff and former staff had accessed Oliver’s records over the past decade.

So far, the trust’s probe has found that a doctor who does not work at the trust had accessed Oliver’s records without a legitimate reason as recently as March this year. Four staff members still working at the trust remain under investigation.

Of 22 staff members still working at the trust, 15 have been found to have had legitimate reasons for accessing his records, for example, as they cared for him or were involved in subsequent investigations.

In an email from Professor Steven Hams, the trust’s chief nursing and improvement officer, to the McGowans this week, seen by The Independent, it said: “At present, three current employees remain under formal investigation because the Trust has not yet established a legitimate clinical or operational reason for their access to Oliver’s records. These investigations have not concluded, and no final determination has been made...

“Of these three individuals, two are registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Council, and one is a student undertaking nurse training.

“A fourth individual remains under separate review with the Chief Medical Officer. No determination has yet been made in relation to that access.

“In relation to former employees, I have written to those for whom contact details are available and requested responses by 2 October 2026. Those enquiries remain ongoing.

“As previously advised, one former employee has already been identified as having accessed Oliver’s records without an established legitimate reason and has self-referred to the General Medical Council. The final number of inappropriate accesses, and the total number involving professionally registered individuals, cannot therefore be confirmed until the outstanding investigations and enquiries have concluded.”

Another email from Professor Hams to the McGowans in August, seen by The Independent, confirmed an audit showed 653 instances of Oliver’s records being viewed or printed.

Mr McGowan told The Independent: “The investigation is still ongoing, but we do know there was no appropriate reason to go in and access the information. Whether there's malice involved, I don't know. But what we do know is that Jim Mackey has said that this won't be tolerated. What we call out for is for him to actually take action. We know this isn't isolated to Oliver's case.”

The trust has made a precautionary notification to the Information Commissioner’s Office over the potential breaches.

Professor Hams said in a statement to The Independent: "We are deeply sorry for the additional distress and anxiety that this situation may have caused Oliver’s parents at what has already been an incredibly difficult time for their family.

“Every patient and family has the right to expect that their personal information will be treated with care, respect and confidentiality. Any concern that records may have been accessed without a legitimate reason is something we take extremely seriously.

“As soon as these potential issues were identified, we took immediate action, including self-referring the matter to the Information Commissioner's Office and undertaking a thorough investigation.

“Most of the accesses reviewed have been linked to legitimate clinical or operational activity. A very small number of instances remain under investigation, and it would be inappropriate to reach conclusions before those enquiries are complete.

“We remain committed to being open and transparent about our findings. Should any inappropriate access or misconduct be identified, appropriate action will be taken through the relevant processes.

“We have remained in close contact with Oliver’s parents throughout this investigation and will continue to keep them informed as our enquiries progress."