I made a complaint to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO), expecting an independent review grounded in current evidence and safeguarding awareness. What I experienced instead was deeply concerning.The SPSO accepted obsolete medical data without proper scrutiny, despite a more recent clinical context being available. When medical information is outdated, incomplete, or superseded, reliance on it undermines the integrity of any investigation. An ombudsman should be challenging weak evidence — not reinforcing it.Even more troubling was the apparent failure to recognise over-the-counter (OTC) medication as a viable suicide risk factor. OTC medications are widely documented as being used in self-harm and suicide attempts. To treat them as insignificant or irrelevant demonstrates a lack of understanding of real-world safeguarding risks.When an oversight body minimises credible risk indicators and leans on outdated material, it does more than make a procedural error — it risks normalising unsafe practice across public services.The SPSO exists to hold institutions accountable. That requires critical analysis, up-to-date medical awareness, and an understanding of vulnerability. In my case, those standards were not met.I cannot recommend the service based on my experience.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) is the final stage for complaints about councils, the National Health Service, housing associations, colleges and universities, prisons, most water providers, the Scottish Government and its agencies and departments and most Scottish authorities.