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

R Kline

Roger Kline is co-author of "Professional accountability in health and social care: Challenging unacceptable practice and its management" (Sage 2012)
Roger is a special adviser to Public Concern at Work and an active supporter of Patients First.
Roger has worked as a trade union official for eight different trade unions

Recent activity

Comments (79)

  • Comment on: The Pauline Cafferkey case: what really happened?

    R Kline's comment 16 September, 2016 9:42 pm

    There is nothing here that suggests this case needed to reach a hearing. Surely a robust pre-hearing process could have come to the conclusion that it was most unlikely that any case against this registrant would be upheld.

    If not, what does this say about the pre-hearing process?

    The upshot is that someone widely regarded as a brave role model faced public humiliation and no doubt immense stress.

    Some might draw a contrast between how this case was treated and the inability of the NMC to intervene around bullying or its failure to scrutinise whether there are discriminatory patterns in referrals of registrants.

  • Comment on: Nurse training threat from loss of trust funding

    R Kline's comment 26 August, 2016 3:41 pm

    A strategic own goal of the sort everyone always warns about

  • Comment on: Pauline Cafferkey speaks of 'anguish' over NMC case

    R Kline's comment 2 August, 2016 5:56 pm


  • Comment on: Is the NMC fit for purpose?

    R Kline's comment 16 July, 2016 1:34 pm

    The low esteem in which many nurses and midwives hold the NMC has multiple causes.

    One is certainly the ponderous process around fitness to practice which means that the mere act of referral is a punishment.

    Another is the apparent refusal of the NMC to acknowledge that NMC referral may be used (and is) as an act of retaliation against staff who raise concerns and are then ruthlessly scrutinised by their employer until some (alleged) misdeed is found.

    Another is the perceived unwillingness of the NMC to fail to address the disproportionate referrals of BME registrants .

    The perceived failure to question the treatment of whistleblowers and of BME registrants is not a neutral act. It is can easily be seen as colluding in victimisation and discrimination.

    Those who have tried to engage constructively with the NMC on these issues believe they have failed - feeling ground down by inactivity or, in some cases take the view that they have been met with what seems to be wilful blindness.

  • Comment on: Brexit: The NHS must be protected in the wake of this decision

    R Kline's comment 24 June, 2016 4:17 pm

    Spot on Jenni.

    I hope any nurses and midwives who voted for Brexit will realise the terrible risks this may trigger and we can all work together to protect health and social care

View all comments