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 was not satisfied that her conduct with regard to charges 5, 6 and 7 amounted to serious misconduct.
In relation to the remaining facts (charges 1,2,3,4 and 8) the panel concluded she had breached the code. The panel concluded that her actions in charges 1, 2, 3, 4 and 8 cumulatively were serious matters and fell significantly short of what would be expected of a registered nurse. It decided that they amounted to misconduct.
Determination on sanction
In terms of mitigating factors, the panel took account of her otherwise unblemished career. Save for the incidents in question, there was no evidence before the panel of any other concerns regarding her practice.
She had fully engaged with this NMC process and attended the hearing unrepresented. The panel accepted that her evidence was honest and that she had demonstrated integrity throughout these proceedings.
The panel also noted that she had raised and escalated concerns at the practice, both in terms of her own errors and concerns regarding the practice in general.
The panel also took account of the positive testimonials and references provided on her behalf. It considered that she had expressed heartfelt remorse and that she was “deeply saddened by [her] lapse”. The panel also considered that the misconduct related to one specific area of her nursing practice.
In terms of aggravating factors, the panel bore in mind that the incidents in question demonstrated a pattern of similar errors over a 15-month period. The misconduct could not be described as a single isolated episode of misconduct.
In the case of charge 8, her error occurred following a period of supervision and having been signed off as competent in administering immunisations and vaccinations less than three months previously. The panel also considered that she had demonstrated only limited insight.
The panel imposed a conditions of practice order for 12 months.