Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

'Agitator' label spurred nurse to become first 'whistleblowing guardian'

  • 14 Comments

The chief nurse appointed as the first national NHS whistleblowing guardian for England has revealed her own experiences of being labelled an “agitator” during her career are what drove her to take on the role.

In an exclusive interview, Dame Eileen Sills said there had been “several” occasions, in both junior and senior nurse roles, when she felt she “couldn’t get my voice heard in the way I wanted”.

Dame Eileen – who will split her time between the guardian role and her current post as chief nurse at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust – said in one case she left her job because it was the “wrong culture for her”.

“One of the key concerns from whistleblowers is the follow up…so our credibility will be based on the fact that we will see things through”

Eileen Sills

Although she did not class herself as a whistleblower, Dame Eileen said she wanted to use these experiences and also her current role, in which she works a weekly clinical shift, to help create a more open culture for staff to speak up in the NHS.

“Certainly in one post I had to leave because I didn’t thrive in that culture and I struggled to get my voice heard. I’ve also in my career been called an agitator, which did actually insult me, but what that does is make you go silent,” she said in a joint interview with Nursing Times and sister title Health Service Journal.

The post, appointed by regulator the Care Quality Commission, has been created as part of the government’s response to the Freedom to Speak Up report on raising concerns in the health service by Sir Robert Francis.

Dame Eileen will advise a network of local whistleblowing guardians – to be appointed in each trust – responsible for supporting staff to speak up within their organisations and will help develop their required training.

She will also review cases in which staff feel their concerns have been poorly handled by trusts or other bodies.

However, her office – expected to initially comprise six people – will not investigate individual cases but will instead review processes used to deal with the complaint.

The role will have no statutory powers to demand action from trusts, but if its recommendations are not acted upon then it will inform the relevant regulators.

“One of the key concerns from whistleblowers is the follow up, that actually you’ve investigated something, a set of recommendations, but I’m still hearing it’s not changed and it’s not happened. So our credibility will be based on the fact that we will see things through,” said Dame Eileen.

“Sometimes in a multidisciplinary setting the nurse has more difficulties to be able to have the confidence to speak up”

Eileen Sills

She said she was still yet to confirm exactly how the role would work and interact with regulators and that further details would be available following the publication later this month of results from a consultation on the national guardian role.

But, she said she would be looking to spot particular organisations or parts of the country that were regularly failing to deal with whistleblowing concerns.

“If we’re picking up a common thread either in a locality, or a few things in one organisation, or issues that are common to a number of organisations… it would be remiss of me, even as a professional not to feed that into the system,” she said.

Student nurses and other trainees were highlighted by Sir Robert’s review as being particularly vulnerable when speaking up due to fears their marks could suffer while on placement.

Dame Eileen said she would work with national workforce body Health Education England to alert them, as a commissioner of training places, to problems.

When asked what difference it made having a nurse in post as the country’s first whistleblowing guardian, Dame Eileen said she hoped it would encourage clinicians to engage with her, because she knew “how difficult sometimes it is to provide care”.

She noted that nurses – as the biggest part of the workforce and being the staff members that are there 24-hours-a-day – were often seen by patients as their advocates, but could lack the confidence to speak up.

“Sometimes, in a multidisciplinary setting, the nurse has more difficulties to be able to have the confidence to speak up, especially if surrounded by very clear authoritative individuals in that team,” she told Nursing Times.

If every nurse felt able to raise concerns it would “hugely influence” the rest of the team, she said. However, she stressed that, despite her insight in this area, nursing and midwifery would not dominate her office’s work.

Asked if she felt it would be difficult to carry out both her chief nurse and guardian role on a part-time basis, following questions raised by some on social media, she said would deliver both jobs in the time it took to do them.

“I’m in this to make it successful and I really wish the issue of part-time status to drop off and people judge me on the deliverables”

Eileen Sills

“I can see why people have criticised the issue of part-time status, I completely get it but I would just like to say to people I fully understand my roles and responsibilities in both jobs and I will deliver both,” she said.

However, she noted that the guardian role would be reviewed after six months. She said she had requested this formal assessment because it was important to check that progress was being made and also to ensure it could be done part-time.

Dame Eileen said she had forfeited engagements and external responsibilities outside of her chief nurse role that are “really dear to my heart” to ensure there was time to take on the post.

“I’m in this to make it successful and I really wish the issue of part time status to drop off and people judge me on the deliverables,” she added. 

  • 14 Comments

Readers' comments (14)

  • michael stone

    Give the woman a chance !

    Judge her on whether or not things improve - she is spot-on about many things, including:

    '“One of the key concerns from whistleblowers is the follow up, that actually you’ve investigated something, a set of recommendations, but I’m still hearing it’s not changed and it’s not happened. So our credibility will be based on the fact that we will see things through,” said Dame Eileen.'

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What nonsense...appoint somebody who has no issues of trust or independance to start with..... not wait until they can prove it. There are others who could do the job.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • PS what good did the whistle blowing policy do the young people who were being brutalised in the young offenders institution as highlighted on TV recently. Nobody, including the NHS personnel who were working there spoke up.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well that would be a good start for Eileen..Investigate that abuse and the silence by nurses and doctors working there which enabled it to continue until a reporter exposed them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The problem with investigating processes it doesn't morally assert the rationale to what a person whistleblows. As such it can be utilised further to the wrong benefit of an organisation and deflate the right concerns. The use of whistle blower guardiians already employed by trusts' is faulty where lack of independence holds true. Also the CQC in its function of selection for guardians is faulty in as much as reference to publications of reports that don't define whistle blower specificity to issues. Also there are cases of whistleblowers being referred to the NMC and as such a credible function would be to intercede and over-rule the NMC where this is a real potential. We now know of wasted court monies where cases suggest this is the conclusion of having whistleblown. But also guardians should be nurses or Does but not be under regulator code other than the law itslef. In this way the NMC and other regulators could be investigated without any fear.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Susanne Stevens: I absolutely agree with you, but when are they going to televise issues of staff getting abused? Will the CQC investigate?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How many people does it take to change a light bulb? How long is a piece of string?..... One person, for the whole of the NHS?
    Although Eileen Sills may well be have boundless energy and happy to put in endless hours of her time and scrutiny to this issue, it is not going to work.
    It trivialises an endemic problem, it is a sop, it is condescending in the extreme to feel that this is adequate or appropriate to deal with how people are heard and what happens to them afterwards.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • michael stone

    ANONYMOUS17 JANUARY, 2016 8:44 AM

    It isn't 'one person for the whole NHS'.

    The role of the National Guardian, is to support 'Local Guardians' who will be present within each organisation (hospital or whatever), and it is the local guardians who will need to clean-up behaviour around 'whistleblowing' and make sure that organisations handle concerns properly.

    It is the local guardians - which seem to me to be too closely linked to management, and not directly appointed 'by the shop floor' - where I myself would have introduced a different system to the one being introduced.

    But we'll need to see what happens - it appears that Eileen has got some discretion over the definition of her own role: that doesn't seem to have been 'fully tied down' yet.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The fact that Eileen herself is a CEO is also faulty and contradicts her role where there is potential whistleblowing within her own trust. There is an increasing emphasis that NHS CEOs are the only success to driving forward with whistleblowing and as such become a major part of the problem - they in effect find it difficult when they are wrong or have emotionally invested so heavily they are unwilling to accept critique. Where it is found that CEOs have skewed findings they should be immediately named and shamed, and removed without pension or benefits. But also we must endeavour to understand/ define the relations between the CQC and trust boards. Now if you were going to give the role to me you would ensure no favouritism could ensue and thorough investigation of boards to uncover any wrongdoing before a case even arose. Eileen and the CQC I ask one thing don't give such roles to those employed by the NHS already and I promise you I will apply.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • One whistleblowing guardian for the whole of the NHS?
    Or, one nurses for the whole of the NHS.......

    Perhaps someone else or perhaps a group of people should have been given this new role? A group of people from outside the NHS who could blow some fresh air and fresh thinking on this corrupt and devious problem.....?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Show 1020results per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.