Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Order Review 15 January 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 61 Aldwych, London WCB2 4AE Name of Registrant: Sukoluhle Sibusiswie Vera NMC PIN: 03E0309O Part(s) of the register: Registered Nurse- Sub Part 1 Mental Health Nursing- December 2006 Panel Members: Legal Assessor: Panel Secretary: NMC: Nurse: Orders to be reviewed: Decision: Ian Luder (Chair/Lay Member) Deborah Tymms (Registrant Member) Marion Saunders (Registrant Member) Andrew Reid Andrew Brown Represented by Mr John Brown, instructed by NMC Regulatory Legal Team Neither present nor represented Suspension Order Striking-off order. Service of Notice of Hearing: Page 1 of 5
The registrant, Ms Vera was not present or represented. The panel accepted the advice of the legal assessor. He examined the documents relevant to proof of service. Notice of today s hearing was sent by recorded delivery and first class post to Ms Vera s registered address on 24 November 2015. The panel was satisfied that service of the Notice of today s hearing has been effected in accordance with Rules 11 and 34 of the NMC Fitness to Practise Rules 2004. Decision to proceed in the absence of Ms Vera: The panel then considered whether to proceed in the absence of Ms Vera Mr Brown, on behalf of the NMC, invited the panel to proceed in Ms Vera s absence today. He told the panel that Ms Vera had not attended the substantive hearing in this matter. He said that prior to the substantive hearing, the NMC had sought a trace to ensure that Ms Vera still resided at her registered address, and the trace confirmed that the address on the register belonged to her and her husband at that time. Mr Brown told the panel that the panel secretary had attempted to contact Ms Vera on her landline telephone number as recorded on the Register on the morning of this review hearing, but had been unsuccessful. He reminded the panel of the public interest in the order being reviewed in a timely manner. Mr Brown submitted that there is no evidence before the panel to suggest that an adjournment would secure Ms Vera s attendance in future. The panel accepted the advice of the legal assessor. The panel exercised its discretion to proceed in the absence of Ms Vera with the utmost care and caution. The panel accepted that the NMC had made every effort to contact Ms Vera. It did not draw any inference from the fact that the telephone number the NMC has for Ms Vera is no longer active. It bore in mind the public interest for the order to be reviewed expeditiously. The panel also bore in mind Ms Vera s lack of engagement in the whole of the NMC process since December 2013, and that she did not attend the Page 2 of 5
substantive hearing in this matter. Ms Vera has made no request for an adjournment and the panel had no reason to believe that an adjournment would secure her attendance at a future date or that it would serve any useful purpose. Having weighed the interests of Ms Vera with those of the NMC and the public interest in an expeditious disposal of this hearing, the panel decided to proceed in her absence. Decision and Reasons: The panel had regard to the submissions of Mr Brown on behalf of the NMC. It accepted the advice of the legal assessor. This is the first review, in accordance with Article 30(1) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001, of the Suspension Order imposed by a Conduct and Competence Committee at a hearing of 23 January 2015. The current order is due to expire at the end of 25 February 2016. The charges found proved against Ms Vera at the substantive hearing were as follows: That you, a registered nurse: 1. Were convicted at Banbury Magistrates Court on 12 July 2013 of driving a motor vehicle with an alcohol level above the prescribed limit, contrary to section 5(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. 2. Were convicted at Banbury Magistrates Court on 12 July 2013 of driving a motor vehicle and failing to stop after a road accident, contrary to section 170(4) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. 3. On 26 November 2013, you admitted an offence of, and received a police caution for assault/ill-treatment/neglect/abandonment of a child/young person to cause Page 3 of 5
unnecessary suffering/injury contrary to the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 section 1(1). And, in light of the above, your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of your convictions and caution. Mr Brown told the panel that there has been no change in circumstances in this case. He said that there is no evidence to suggest that Ms Vera has addressed the concerns identified by the substantive panel. He drew attention to the suggestions of that panel as to steps Ms Vera may take to assist this panel. He said that Ms Vera has not engaged with the suggestions. Mr Brown submitted that, in all the circumstances, Ms Vera s fitness to practise remains impaired. He submitted that the panel may be of the view that a further period of suspension, at least, is appropriate in this case. The panel accepted the advice of the legal assessor. The panel considered whether Ms Vera s fitness to practise remains impaired. The panel was not bound by the decision of the substantive panel. However, there was no new information before it to undermine the finding of impairment in this case. The panel therefore concluded that Ms Vera s fitness to practise remains impaired. Having decided that Ms Vera s fitness to practise is currently impaired, the panel went on to consider what sanction, if any, is appropriate in this case. The panel considered the available sanctions in ascending order beginning with the least restrictive. The panel concluded that allowing the current suspension order to lapse would not be appropriate, given the ongoing risk of repetition. Further, this would not adequately meet the public interest in declaring and upholding proper standards in the nursing profession and upholding public confidence in the profession or the NMC as regulator. The panel then considered replacing the current suspension order with a caution order on its expiry. Such an order would not protect the public from the ongoing risk of harm. Further, the panel decided that a caution order would not be in the public interest in Page 4 of 5
upholding public confidence in the nursing profession, given the serious charges found proved and the risk of repetition in this case. The panel then considered replacing the current suspension order with a conditions of practice order. The panel was of the view that such an order would neither be appropriate nor workable. Ms Vera has not engaged with the NMC process, and the panel had no reason to believe that she would comply with a Conditions of Practice Order. Further, the panel bore in mind that there are no identifiable areas of concern in Ms Vera s clinical practice that could be addressed by conditions. It therefore concluded that a conditions of practice order would not be sufficient to address the concerns identified in this case, to protect the public or maintain public confidence in the nursing profession and the NMC as regulator. The panel next considered a further period of suspension. The panel bore in mind the seriousness of Ms Vera s convictions and caution. Ms Vera has provided no evidence to this panel to suggest that the risk of repetition of her actions leading to her convictions and caution has been reduced. Ms Vera has not engaged with the NMC process and, in particular, has not engaged with the suggestions of the previous panel. In all the circumstances, the panel considered that Ms Vera s convictions and caution, compounded by her total lack of engagement with the NMC process are fundamentally incompatible with her ongoing registration. The panel concluded that a striking-off order is the only available sanction sufficient to protect the public and maintain public confidence in the nursing profession and NMC as its regulator. The panel therefore determined to impose a striking off order. In accordance with Article 30(1) this will take effect on the expiry of the current order at the end of 25 February 2016. Page 5 of 5