DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO
Panel:
- Chairperson
- Public Representative
- Member, RPN
- Member, RN
BETWEEN
COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO Counsel for College of Nurses of Ontario
- and -
Neila Walker, RN #56-0274-3
REASONS FOR DECISION
Counsel for Neila Walker, RN
Heard: May 10, 1999
A panel of the Discipline Committee convened on May 10, 1999 to consider the following allegation against Neila Walker, RN (the “Member”):
- You have committed an act of professional misconduct as provided by subsection 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code of the Nursing Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c.32, as amended, and defined in subsection 1(37) of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that on or about April, 1997, while employed as a Registered Nurse at , in the City of Toronto, in the Province of Ontario, you engaged in conduct or performed an act, relevant to the practice of nursing, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional in that:
a. you were in possession of marijuana; and/or
b. you were in the possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking; and/or
c. you were cultivating marijuana.
In presenting the Notice of Haring, Counsel for the College of Nurses of Ontario (“CNO” or “College”) advised the panel that allegation 1(b) would not be pursued. This statement clarified the College’s position for the panel. This position was accepted by defense counsel.
Ms. Walker was represented by counsel and admitted allegations 1(a) and (c). The Chair asked Ms. Walker the following questions:
Have you reviewed the allegations against you in the notice of hearing?
Do you understand the allegations made against you?
Do you understand the consequences of admitting to the allegations (including relinquishing the right to compel the College to prove its case against you)?
Are you admitting to the allegations voluntarily, and of your own free will?
Do you understand that any agreement between yourself and the College is not binding on this panel (and that the panel is not bound to accept a joint submission to penalty)?
Ms. Walker through her counsel answered all the questions in the affirmative.
Agreed Statement of Facts
The panel was presented with an agreed statement of facts as follows:
D.H. Neila J. Walker (Bell) (a.k.a. Dorothy Hazel Bell Walker) (the “Member”) has been registered as a Registered Nurse with the College of Nurses of Ontario (the “College”) since 1956. She has had no previous complaints made against her to the College.
Ms. Walker is 63 years old.
Ms. Walker worked as an RN at the Health Care Unit at from June 25, 1990 to May 1, 1997, the date of her termination.
Ms. Walker’s duties at the Health Care Unit included assessing the health of as well as treating and administering medications.
As a result of information provided by a police informant , in April 1997, the Metropolitan Toronto Police Service searched Ms. Walker’s apartment and found approximately 100 high quality marijuana (Cannabis Sativa) plants being grown in hydroponic growing media under artificial lights.
As a result of this search, the Metropolitan Toronto Police Service charged Ms. Walker with the criminal offences of possession of a narcotic, cultivation of a narcotic, and possession of a narcotic for the purposes of trafficking, namely marijuana, contrary to subsections 3(1), 6(1), and 4(2), respectively, of the Narcotic Control Act, R.S., c. N-1, as amended.
Ms. Walker was convicted of possessing the narcotic marijuana for the purposes of trafficking contrary to subsection 4(2) the Narcotic Control Act in May 1998, and was given a suspended sentence and two years probation. A condition of her probation is that she not purchase, possess, or consume narcotics except in accordance with a medical prescription.
Ms. Walker does not admit that she was actually engaged in trafficking marijuana.
Ms. Walker does admit that she was in possession of marijuana, and was cultivating marijuana, and that she thereby engaged in conduct or committed an act, relevant to the practice of nursing that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional.
Following deliberation, the panel accepted the Agreed Statement of Fact as presented.
Joint Submission on Penalty
The panel was presented with the joint submission on penalty in which it was submitted that the panel should:
direct the College’s Executive Director to suspend Ms. Walker’s certificate of registration for a period of six months, with five months of the suspension to be suspended, and
require Ms. Walker to appear before a panel of the Discipline Committee to be reprimanded.
The panel heard submissions from College counsel and the counsel for Ms. Walker. The panel recessed to deliberate and subsequently accepted the joint submission on penalty as presented. In essence, the panel agreed that the penalty was appropriate as it met the mandate of the College to protect the public interest.
The Chair asked Ms. Walker if she wished to receive the oral reprimand at the conclusion of the hearing or at a later date. Ms. Walker agreed to sign the waiver (of appeal) and receive the reprimand at the
conclusion of the hearing.
The panel recessed to prepare for the oral reprimand. The panel re-convened with Ms. Walker present and the oral reprimand was delivered.
I, , sign this decision and reasons for the decision as Chairperson of this Discipline Panel and on behalf of the members of the Discipline Panel as listed below:
, Chairperson Date