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

Final panel decision: What should happen to a nurse who did not report errors in administering medication?

  • 3 Comments

Find out how the NMC panel acted in this case. Not yet read the case? Read the charge and background here 

The panel decided to impose a caution order for three years. In reaching this decision, the panel considered that the aggravating factors were as follows:

The panel considered that the aggravating factors were as follows:

  • Fraudulent entries in a CD record have potential to put patients at serious risk of harm;
  • Your dishonesty is exacerbated by your further dishonesty during the local investigation;
  • Your failures related to basic nursing practice and breached local policies.

The panel considered that the mitigating factors were as follows:

  • No regulatory concerns about you prior to, or since the incidents, on the nightshift of 13–14 June 2017;
  • You have put forward positive references and testimonials from current employer and other professionals who are aware of these matters;
  • You have provided evidence of insight and shown an understanding of the seriousness of your dishonesty and how you would address matters if a similar situation occurred in the future;
  • You admitted the charges at the outset of this hearing and never sought to minimise your failings; and
  • You have engaged with the Nursing and Midwifery Council and been candid throughout these proceedings.

The panel noted that this case involved dishonesty to conceal record-keeping issues, which had the potential to cause harm to patients. The panel were of the view that the dishonesty was not systematic, deliberate or longstanding. Rather, it was opportunistic, and could only have started at the earliest on 7 June 2017. The dishonesty, while wrong in any circumstance, was engaged in to facilitate the timely delivery of the necessary pain relief to Patient A.

The panel noted that Nurse A had had shown considerable insight into her misconduct, and dishonesty. The panel noted that she made admissions to all the facts, the misconduct and impairment at the outset of this hearing.

Nurse A apologised to the panel for her misconduct and dishonesty, and displayed genuine remorse for what she had done and how this put patients at risk of harm and damaged the reputation of the profession. Nurse A undertook to the panel that she would not repeat the misconduct and described how she would act if a similar set of circumstances arose in future.

Nurse A had engaged with the NMC since the referral. The panel was been told that there were no adverse findings in relation to her practice either before or since these incidents. Furthermore, she provided the panel with several very positive character and clinical practice testimonials, including one from her current employer.

  • 3 Comments

Readers' comments (3)

  • Suspension: the nurse or midwife will be suspended from practice for a period of initially not longer than one year, but this can be extended after review by an FTP panel

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Conditions of practice

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I feel that this was the correct decision - the NMC has protected the public without destroying her career which was otherwise blemish free

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

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.