A Coronial Inquest into the tragic death of 83-year-old Noreen Peacock has reached a conclusion, with Magistrate Sharon Freund delivering her findings.
Ms Freund’s report details the “extraordinarily sad case” of an elderly woman who died after battling dementia, and the impact of the situation on her daughter, Melissa, who was her sole carer.
Background
Noreen Peacock had three daughters, but she was only in contact with Melissa, who lived with her. The pair was very close and had a “dependent” relationship. However, Melissa was struggling with her own mental health issues, in addition to working six days per week as a casual receptionist at Norwich Private Hospital.
In 2010, Noreen was diagnosed with advanced dementia, and doctors advised Melissa to seek a specialist carer for her. But Melissa was concerned that having strangers in the home would “freak” her mother out, and took on the burden of being her ailing mother’s sole carer. Melissa decided that she would not take her mother to the doctor from that time on.
Noreen was locked inside the house for up to 9 hours at a time while Melissa attended work. She was isolated from the outside world and, at the time of her death, weighed just 37 kilograms. She was eventually found by a real estate agent in a “mummified condition” in her bedroom.
The Coroner’s report found that although Melissa had done a “remarkable” job of caring for her mother for a number of years, this had changed after the formal diagnosis of dementia.
Cause of death
In order to specify a cause of death, coroners must be “comfortably satisfied by reasonably compelling evidence” that there was a particular reason for the death. In Noreen’s case, the Coroner found that a range of factors may have contributed, and that there was insufficient evidence of any specific cause.
Accordingly, she marked the cause of death as “undetermined”. However, the Coroner did speculate that a range of factors could have contributed to Noreen’s ultimate passing, including her low body weight, the lack of medical attention, and the fact that she had regularly been left in the room without heating – which may have caused hyperthermia.
The Coroner was unimpressed by Melissa’s failure to engage her mother with the outside world or to provide adequate medical attention. She stated:
“It was, in my view, totally unacceptable that Mrs Peacock was deprived of medical attention from November 2010. It is also unacceptable that Mrs Peacock was being left alone, locked in a two-storey house for up to nine hours a day, six days a week for many months while Melissa went to work.”
The Coroner did, however, acknowledge Melissa personal problems, which included depression and alcoholism.
Is Melissa Legally Responsible?
Although the Coroner fell short of attributing legal responsibility for Noreen’s death to Melissa, she did find sufficient evidence that Melissa had contravened section 35 of the Coroner’s Act 2009 (NSW). Accordingly, Melissa has been charged under that section.
Section 35 imposes an obligation on anyone who has reasonable grounds to believe that someone has died to report this to a police officer or coroner, if it:
- Is a ‘reportable death’; and
- Has not already been reported.
Section 6 defines a ‘reportable death’ as including the situation where a medical practitioner had not seen the deceased in the 6 months prior to their death. The maximum penalty for the offence is a fine of $1,100.
Melissa has also been charged with fraud for using her mother’s credit card after the death. The maximum penalty for that offence is imprisonment for 10 years.
The case serves as a reminder that individuals assume various legal responsibilities when caring for the elderly and other vulnerable people, even if they are genuinely endeavouring to do the right thing.
