Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/nclexion/public_html/wp-content/themes/jnews/class/ContentTag.php on line 47
Find out how the NMC panel acted in this case. Not yet read the case? Read the charge and background here
The panel took account of the aggravating and mitigating features in this case.
In respect of aggravating features, the panel identified that there is a risk of repetition, as Nurse A has not adequately addressed her core deficiencies in leadership and that she failed to demonstrate any real insight into her misconduct, showing a tendency to blame to others rather than acknowledge her responsibilities and weaknesses as a leader. Her failings exposed this Patient 1 to a risk of significant harm.
In respect of mitigating features, the panel noted that her misconduct occurred during a single shift. They recognised the context of the incident, noting the fact that she was the only nurse on duty on the night of the incident and on the unit, was supported by only one very new carer. Nurse A has positively engaged with the Nursing and Midwifery Council throughout the proceedings and has undertaken some relevant training, partly at her own expense.
The panel first considered whether to take no action but concluded that this would be inappropriate, particularly in view of the risk of repetition identified in this case.
Next, in considering a caution order and noted that it would not restrict her practice. In the light of the panel’s finding of a risk of repetition in its determination on impairment, the panel concluded that such an order would not sufficiently protect the public.
The panel considered a suspension but decided it would be disproportionate and cause undue hardship and prevent Nurse A from addressing her deficiencies in a clinical environment.
The panel then considered whether placing conditions of practice would be a sufficient and appropriate response. The panel was mindful that any conditions imposed must be relevant, proportionate, measurable and workable.
The panel determined that it would be possible to formulate appropriate and workable conditions to address Nurse A’s particular failings and to provide sufficient protection to patients.
The panel was of the view that there were identifiable areas of her practice in need of retraining and continued monitoring, specifically in relation to her understanding and implementation of leadership skills, effective delegation and deployment of staff, and ensuring effective team-working.
The panel determined that, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate, sufficient, and proportionate sanction is that of a conditions of practice order for 18 months.
The panel determined that this period would appropriately mark the seriousness of the misconduct, while providing Nurse A with sufficient time in which to demonstrate adequate remediation and fully address the concerns identified.