Nursing and Midwifery Council:

Transcription

1 Nursing and Midwifery Council Investigating Committee Incorrect Entry Hearing 12 March Aldwych, London, WC2B 4AE Nursing and Midwifery Council Name of registrant: NMC PIN: Part(s) of the register: Hannah Adeogun 99Y0067E RNA, Registered Nurse - Adult (11 September 2002) RM, Registered Midwife (2 November 2006) Area of Registered Address: Panel Members: Legal Assessor: Panel Secretary: Ms Adeogun: Nursing and Midwifery Council: England Peter Cadman (Chair, Lay member) Julie Wainwright (Registrant member) Anne Brown (Lay member) Charles Conway Maya Hussain Present and not represented Represented by Dulcie Piff, Case Presenter Facts proved by admission: 1 Outcome: Interim Order: Entry on the register was incorrectly made; the panel direct the Registrar to remove the entry on the midwifery part of the register only, in accordance with Article 26(7) of the Order Interim conditions of practice order (18 months) 1

2 Details of charge: 1. On your application for revalidation dated 30 August 2017 you indicated that you had completed 450 hours of registered midwifery practice in the previous three years when you had completed less than 450 hours of registered midwifery practice. And thereby an entry on the midwifery part of the NMC register in the name of Hannah Adeogun, 99Y0067E was incorrectly made. Background: The allegation relates to your application for revalidation to the NMC which stated that you had completed 450 hours of registered midwifery practice in the previous three years when you had completed less than 450 hours of registered midwifery practice. In order to remain on the NMC register, a registered nurse is required to undergo a revalidation and registration renewal process. Revalidation was introduced in April All nurses and midwives in the United Kingdom (UK) must undertake this to maintain their registration with the NMC. The revalidation requirements are as follows: hours of registered practice in the previous three years; - 35 hours (including 20 participatory hours) of CPD in the previous three years; - Five pieces of practice related feedback; - Five reflective accounts; - A reflective discussion with an NMC registrant; - Confirmation. Registrants are recommended to keep a portfolio of evidence that they have met the revalidation requirements. The NMC notifies registrants at least 60 days before their revalidation application is due. Once notified, registrants are required to complete an online revalidation application form. As part of that application, registrants need to declare to the NMC that they have complied with the revalidation requirements. 2

3 You came onto the register as a nurse in You subsequently qualified as a midwife in Since you are dual qualified, you are required to complete 450 hours in both midwifery and nursing. This equates to 900 hours. In your application for revalidation dated 30 August 2017, you declared that you complied with the revalidation requirements as part of the application. Your registration was subsequently renewed on 27 September On 1 September 2017, you ed UK enquiries requesting an extension of time on your revalidation application. Your registration fee was collected on 1 September 2017 as required in order to revalidate your registration. On 14 September 2017, a member of the UK registration centre team, Ms 1, responded to your enquiries by . Ms 1 stated that you had already submitted your revalidation application and declared 450 hours of nursing and midwifery. Ms 1 asked you to clarify what the extension was required for. On 15 September 2017, you responded to Ms 1 s confirming that you had not completed 450 hours of midwifery practice. You said that you required an extension of time on your revalidation application in order to meet the practice hour requirement of revalidation. It is therefore alleged that, as you submitted an application for revalidation that contained an incorrect declaration, your entry on the NMC register was incorrectly made. This exchange of s was not considered by the Registrar when the decision was made to renew your entry on the register. At the outset of the hearing, you admitted the factual charges and you acknowledged that your entry on the NMC register was incorrectly made. In the light of the above, the panel found charge 1 proved by way of admission. Evidence: The panel heard oral evidence from one witness called by the NMC: 3

4 Ms 2, Senior Registration and Revalidation Officer at the NMC. Ms 2 confirmed that her statement was the correct recollection of the events and she confirmed that the decision of the Registrar was made on the basis of your application for revalidation dated 30 August Decision on direction: Having determined that an entry on to the NMC register was incorrectly made, the panel went on to decide what direction, if any, to make under Article 26(7) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order (2001) (the Order). Article 26(7) of the Order states:..if the Investigating Committee is satisfied that an entry in the register has been fraudulently procured or incorrectly made, it may make an order that the Registrar remove or amend the entry and shall notify the person concerned of his right of appeal under article 38. Ms Piff, on behalf of the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), submitted that since you have not completed the relevant hours in respect of midwifery, the Registrar s decision to renew your registration was based on inaccurate information. She submitted that there is a public interest consideration that upon receiving an application for revalidation, the Registrar needs to be in a position to treat the information provided as accurate. She submitted that this is not the case today and you were admitted to the register on an incorrect basis. Ms Piff submitted that you have practised for fewer than the required number of hours in the three year period since your registration was last renewed, or you joined the register as a midwife. Ms Piff therefore invited the panel to remove the entry from the register. Ms Piff submitted that taking no action would not be appropriate in this case, as it was not a trivial or totally immaterial matter, nor could the information be corrected. She submitted that this entry was not capable of being amended as this was not a simple administrative error. Having found 4

5 that the decision was based on incorrect information, to make any order other than removal would risk appropriating the Registrar s function. You submitted that an amendment of the entry should be made in order to allow you to undertake the required hours in order to continue practising as a midwife. The panel accepted the advice of the legal assessor. Having determined that your entry to the register had been incorrectly entered, the panel then considered what order, if any, to make under Article 26(7) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order (2001) (the Order). When making its decision, the panel had careful regard to the submissions from the NMC, from you, and all the evidence put before it including your written submissions dated 16 November 2018 and 12 March The panel considered that these related to your suitability to practise as a nurse or midwife and were not relevant to the matters that it had to consider today. Likewise your submissions were in the form of a complaint that the NMC failed to respond for more than 40 days after your dated 1 September The panel first considered taking no action. It considered that taking no action might be appropriate if the error or inaccuracy in the applications process was trivial or immaterial; has since been remedied; or the Registrar has subsequently correctly entered the individual on the register. However, it considered that the defect in your entry on the register was neither trivial nor clearly immaterial; nor had it been remedied or subsequently corrected. The panel therefore considered that to take no action would be inappropriate. The panel then went onto consider amending the entry. The panel concluded that there is no error on the entry which is capable of amendment. The panel then considered whether it should direct the Registrar to remove your entry from the register. The panel recognised that it had a discretion as to whether or not to order the Registrar to remove your entry. 5

6 The panel considered that the integrity of the register is important and must be upheld to ensure public confidence in the NMC and its register. The panel recognised that whether or not a registrant should be on the register is a decision for the Registrar. It considered that the Registrar in fulfilling this function should have all the correct and relevant information in order to make this decision and the panel did not seek to usurp the Registrar s role. In all the circumstances, the panel determined that the only appropriate order in this case is to direct the Registrar to remove your entry from the midwifery part of the NMC register. This decision does not affect your continued entry on the register as a nurse. Decision on Interim Order: Miss Piff submitted that an interim order should be made on the grounds of public protection and public interest in order to cover the appeal period. She invited the panel to impose a conditions of practice order for a period of 18 months which included one condition; to not work as a midwife. She submitted that such an order should be made following proved allegations of an incorrect entry and the panel s decision to direct that the Registrar remove your entry from the register. Miss Piff submitted that a suspension order would be disproportionate because it would also suspend your practice as a nurse. She further submitted that to impose no order would be incompatible with the panel s earlier findings and its direction. You submitted that you wanted assistance and advice as to how to return to the register as a midwife. The panel accepted the legal assessor s advice. Having directed that the Registrar remove your entry from the register, the panel considered whether an interim order was required under Article 26(11) of the Order, to cover the appeal period before the panel s direction takes effect and thereafter should any appeal be made. 6

7 Article 31 of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 outlines the criteria for the imposition of an interim order. The panel may only make an interim order if it is satisfied that it is necessary for the protection of the public, or is otherwise in the public interest or in your own interests. The panel considered the submissions made by Ms Piff and by you. In considering whether an order is required in the public interest, the panel was mindful of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the register in order to preserve public confidence in the nursing profession and the NMC as its regulator. The panel noted that you have not worked as a midwife since The panel decided that this case met the public interest bar required and public protection concerns. The panel had regard to the principles of proportionality, and in particular the issue of hardship. However, it determined that any hardship the order may cause you is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the integrity of the register in order to uphold public confidence in the profession and the NMC as regulator. The panel had sight of part of the Sanction Guidance (SG) titled How conditions and sanctions apply to those registered as a both nurse and midwife which stated: We cannot suspend someone from only part of the register. If a panel wants to prevent someone from who is registered as both a nurse and midwife from practising in only one of those professions, it must do so using a conditions of practice order, which would say (for example) you must not practise as a nurse. In all the circumstances the panel concluded that, given its substantive direction, an interim conditions of practice order is necessary in this case for public protection and is in the public interest in order to maintain the integrity of the NMC s Register. The conditions of practice order contains one condition: 7

8 1. You must not practise as a midwife. This order will be for a period of 18 months in order to allow for the possibility of an appeal to be made and determined. If no appeal is made within the 28 day appeal period, this interim order will lapse with the coming into effect of the substantive order to remove the entry. This decision will be confirmed to you in writing. That concludes this determination. 8