NMC feedback – Taking account of context

0
1023

The NMC write:

When people raise concerns about a nurse, midwife or nursing associate’s fitness to practise, it’s our responsibility to act in the way that best protects people from coming to harm in the future.

We don’t seek to blame individuals or the system they work in. But where there’s evidence of a serious concern about a nurse, midwife or nursing associate’s fitness to practise, we need to take action to protect the public. This decision will always involve trying to understand the particular circumstances they were working in at the time. We’ll also need to think about if we need to take any other steps to reduce the risk of something happening again, such as sharing information with other agencies.

We want to be systematic, methodical and consistent in our approach to taking account of context. When we look at concerns that have arisen in somebody’s practice we need to ask:

  • Is there evidence of a serious concern that requires us to take regulatory action to protect the public?
  • If so, why did this happen and do we think it could happen again?
  • If so, what action do we need to take to protect the public?

The above is taken from the NMC website here: Taking account of context – The Nursing and Midwifery Council (nmc.org.uk)

My response is as follows and in red text:

Is there evidence of a serious concern that requires us to take regulatory action to protect the public?
I had previously sent you evidence of a serious concern, that a registered nurse had deliberately lied between when completing a medical assessment. Your response to me is that I should contact the nurses employer, I refuted your response. Your other response to me was that no credible evidence exists, I refuted this by stating that there is clear credible evidence and this evidence was used to overturn decisions which were made from the nurses lies or inaccurate reporting.  The NMC failed to investigate this fitness to practise and failed to answer my concerns and complaints surrounding this.
In 2020 / 2021, I attempted to make / chase up another fitness to practise referral, again this fitness to practise referral has clear evidence of another nurses lies and inaccurate reporting. This is clear cut evidence which can not be refuted. The NMC failed to process this referral as the NMC claimed it had not received my consent for them to investigate.  I pointed out that I had already provided consent. After chasing this up, I provided consent yet again – this time the NMC replied to my email of consent so they could not possibly refute it had not been received. However, despite chasing the referral again, NMC again claimed that consent had not been received. 

If so, why did this happen and do we think it could happen again?
I feel that this happens because the nurses involved have knowledge that their regulatory body (NMC) will take no action in respect of their inaccurate reporting and/or lies.  It has been noted that the NMC regulatory body the Professional Standards Authority has previously intervened in regards to these cases. However, despite this previous intervention, from my own experience after said intervention the NMC are still placing barriers in front of vulnerable people in an effort to dissuade them from making fitness to practise referrals as well as in an effort to dissuade them from making complaints. Given the fact that complaints and concerns I have made repeatedly have not been answered, I see no other form of conclusion.

If so, what action do we need to take to protect the public?
Govern yourselves accordingly inline with your safeguarding policy at least. Do not attempt to ignore complaints and concerns made to you (this has been done to me repeatedly previously and again lately in 2020 and 2021). In the event that you do not ignore complaints and concerns and you reply to them, then address the complaints and concerns rather than making a reply that does not address said complaints and concerns.
You should ideally protect the public – especially vulnerable members of the public who try to process a fitness to practise referral to yourselves by not ignoring their referral, not ignoring the consent they provide for you to investigate (twice despite chasing up).  You should not ignore complaints from the public about the NMC by failing to answer or even reply to the complaints. In the event you do reply to the complaints then you should not reply with a generic response that doesn’t answer the crux of the concerns and complaints. Even when you have failed to answer complaints and I have taken the time to list these in bullet point form in an effort for you to not ignore them, you still reply by not addressing them.

I hope that you will find the above input useful, I guess it will be the NMC usual mantra of “lessons learned” 

 

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here