College of Nurses of Ontario v. Sandra L. Scott, 2012 ONCNO 98105

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO

PANEL: Angela Verrier, RPN, Chairperson

Spencer Dickson, RN Member Kim Jinkerson, RPN Member Gino Cucchi Public Member

John Bald Public Member

BETWEEN:

COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO ) BONNI ELLIS for

) College of Nurses of Ontario

• and - )

SANDRA L SCOTT ) NO REPRESENTATION for

Registration No. #GI12884 ) Sandra L. Scott

) LUISA RITACCA

) Independent Legal Counsel

) Heard: January 31, February 01, 2012

DECISION AND REASONS

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee on January 31, and February 01, 2012 at the College of Nurses of Ontario (“the College”) at Toronto.

As Sandra L. Scott (the “Member”) was not present, the hearing recessed for 15 minutes to allow time for the Member to appear. Upon reconvening, the panel noted that the Member was not in attendance and was not represented.

Counsel for the College provided the panel with evidence that the Member had been sent the Amended Notice of Hearing on December 16, 2011. The panel was satisfied that the Member had received adequate notice of the time, date, place and nature of the hearing, and therefore proceeded with the hearing in the Member’s absence.

The Allegations

The allegations against the Member as stated in the Amended Notice of Hearing dated December 12, 2011, are as follows.

1. You have committed an act of professional misconduct as provided by sub-section 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code of the Nursing Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 32, as amended, and defined in paragraph 1.19 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that you contravened section 11 of the Nursing Act, 1991, when you used the title “RPN” and/or held yourself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as a registered practical nurse while working at [the Facility] when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 and July 2008.

2. You have committed an act or acts 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 paragraph 1.16 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that you inappropriately used the title or designation “RPN” in respect of your practice while working as a registered practical nurse at [the Facility] when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 to July 2008.

3. You have committed an act or acts 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 paragraph 1.15 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that you signed or issued, in your professional capacity, a document or documents that you knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement when you used an electronic signature containing the title or designation “RPN” on clients’ progress notes while working at [the Facility] when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 to July 2008.

4. 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 paragraph 1.37 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that, while employed as a nurse at [the Facility], you engaged in conduct or performed an act, relevant to the practice of nursing, that, having regard to all of the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional and, in particular:

a. you used the tile “RPN” when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 and July 2008;

b. you held yourself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as a registered practical nurse when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 and July 2008; and/or

c. you signed clients’ progress notes using an electronic signature containing the title or designation “RPN” when your certificate of registration was suspended, between approximately April 27, 1996 and July 2008.

5. You have committed an act or acts 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 paragraph 1.15 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that you signed or issued, in your professional capacity, a document or documents that you knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement and, in particular, while employed at [the Facility] you signed or issued fake or altered Annual Payment Cards bearing your name for the years 2003, 2004 and/or 2006.

6. You have committed an act or acts 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, and defined in paragraph 1.19 of Ontario Regulation 799/93 as amended, in that you contravened a provision of the Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 or the regulations under either of those Acts and, in particular, while employed at [the Facility,] you performed controlled act(s) in contravention of subsection 27(1) of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 when you:

a. performed a procedure on tissue below the dermis of [Client A] on or about February 27, 2008;

b. performed a procedure on tissue below the dermis of [Client B] on or about May 12 and/or May 13, 2008;

c. administered Novolin (insulin) by injection to [Client A] on or about April 26, 27, 29, June 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23 and/or 24 2008; and/or

d. administered Novolin (insulin) by injection to [Client B] on or about May 10, 12 and/or 13, 2008.

7. You have committed an act or acts 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 paragraph 1.37 of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that 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 when you:

a. provided your employer, [the Facility], with fake or altered Annual Payment Cards or copies of Annual Payment Cards in your name for the years 2003, 2004 and/or 2006;

b. performed a controlled act or acts in relation to [Client A] on or about February 27, April 26, 27, 29, June 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23 and/or 24, 2008 while employed at [the Facility,] in contravention of subsection 27(1) of the Regulated Health Professions Act; and/or

c. performed a controlled act or acts in relation to [Client B] on or about May 10, 12 and/or May 13, 2008 while employed at [the Facility,] in contravention of subsection 27(1) of the Regulated Health Professions Act.

Member’s Plea

Given that the Member was neither present nor represented, she was deemed to have denied the allegations in the Notice of Hearing. The Hearing proceeded on the basis that the College bore the onus of proving the allegations in the Notice of Hearing against the Member.

Publication Ban

College Counsel requested an order under section 45 s.(3) of the Health Professions Procedural Code (“the Code”) for a publication ban to prevent the broadcasting, disclosing or identifying in any way any of the [clients] referred to in this hearing. The panel granted the request and ordered the publication ban.

Overview

The Member was hired as a Registered Practical Nurse (“RPN”) at [the Facility] in 1990. This [ ] long-term care facility in [ ] Ontario housed a mixed population of [clients] with various physical and cognitive needs.

This facility was mandated by provincial regulation to have one registered staff member on duty at all times. As such, the scheduling allowed for one registered staff member to be assigned to each shift (days, evenings and nights). The Member worked at this facility until her dismissal in July 2008.

At that time, the Assistant Director of Care (“ADOC”) at [the Facility] had called the College of Nurses to verify that all registered staff members, including the Member, had valid certificates of registration and were in good standing. She was told by the College that the Member’s certificate of registration was suspended for non-payment of fees. The ADOC notified the Member, and suspended her employment until she was reinstated with the College. Upon further inspection, it was found that the Member’s suspension had begun in 1996, and she had not had her certificate of registration with the College since that time.

The Member held herself out as a nurse to [the Facility] during her suspension, performed controlled acts, signed her name with an RPN designation in [clients’] electronic medical records and submitted fraudulent [Annual Payment Cards] from the College to her employer to prove her current certification.

The panel heard evidence from three fact witnesses and one expert witness, and received 16 numbered exhibits.

After deliberating, the panel found that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged in all paragraphs of the Amended Notice of Hearing. With respect to allegations #4 (a), (b), (c) and 7 (a), (b), (c) the panel found that the Member’s conduct, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession to be disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.

The Evidence

Issue #1. Did the Member continue to work, or hold herself out, as a registered practical nurse and use the title of nurse while her membership was suspended for non-payment of fees from April 1996 to 2008?

The College called the evidence of [ ] the Director of Care (“DOC”) and administrator from [the Facility]. Her role includes overseeing all operations, nursing staff and general administration of the facility. She testified that the staffing pattern was to have one registered nurse or registered practical nurse on duty at all times.

[The DOC] testified that the Member was hired in 1990. From that date until her dismissal in July 2008, the Member provided nursing care to the [clients]. When the Member was scheduled to work, she was the charge nurse of the facility during the evening and night shifts, and the only registered staff member on duty. [The DOC] identified time sheets and progress notes from [clients’] charts, which indicated that the Member was presenting herself as a registered practical nurse through the time that her certificate of registration with the College was suspended.

College Counsel also called the evidence of [ ] the Assistant Director of Care (“ADOC”) from [the Facility]. [The ADOC] was responsible for the supervision of the nursing and personal support worker staff as well as for providing coverage during those times that the DOC was not present.

[The ADOC] testified that in July 2008, she called the College to verify the registration status of all the nursing staff at the facility. She was told that the Member’s certification was suspended for non-payment of fees. The Member’s employment was terminated July 2008.

Both witnesses testified in a confident and straightforward manner and provided only the answers to the questions posed. The panel found their testimony to be credible.

Issue #2. Did the Member, from 1996 until her termination in 2008, falsely declare to her employer that she was a member of the College with current registration?

[The] coordinator of the customer service department with the College testified [about] the procedures and methods used by the College to keep accurate records of the Member’s communications with the College. He outlined the renewal process used by the College. He testified that the Member’s certificate was suspended in April 1996 and identified the documents attesting to this, such as the letter of intent to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration [ ] and the notice of suspension from the Executive Director [ ].

[The DOC] identified three Annual Payment Cards from the College for the years 2003, 2004 and 2006, [ ] submitted by the Member to the employer. [The DOC] stated it was the practi[c]e at the facility to obtain copies of the registration for all nursing staff for proof of their good standing with the College. In 2008, [the ADOC] called the College to verify the registration of the Member. She was told that the Member had been suspended for non- payment of fees.

[The College employee] reviewed the Annual Payment Cards that the Member had submitted to her employer [ ]. He stated that as these were photocopies, he was unable to determine the validity of the certificates since colour was used to differentiate the various years. He was, however, able to determine that the certificate number on each of these exhibits was assigned to other members of the College, and not to the Member. He stated that every certificate number was original and assigned to different members. He also stated that the Member had been suspended in April 1996 and had not had a certificate of registration since then. He testified that the College’s record of the Member in the computer system is recorded as Sandra L Scott. On all three exhibits, her name was shown as Sandra L. Scott. He stated that the period after her middle initial would not have been entered by the computer. [The College employee] stated that the effective date and the expiry date were not in the correct format [on the certificate] for the year 2006. He stated that this exhibit states the effective date as 01/01/06, and the expiry as 31/12/06. The College that year sent all members an effective date of 01/01/2006 and an expiry of 31/12/2006. He testified that the College did not issue payment cards to the Member for the years 2003, 2004 and 2006.

[The College employee]’s oral testimony was consistent with the exhibits and appeared to be accurate in the presentation of the evidence. The panel considered him to be a credible witness.

Issue #3. Did the Member perform controlled acts in contravention of subsection 27(1) of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (the “RHPA”)?

In oral evidence, [the DOC] identified [ ] medical records for [clients] of [the Facility]. In both [records], the Member initialed and attested that she had taken blood sugar readings, which involved using a lancet to pierce the skin to obtain a blood sample, from [Client A] (February 27, 2008), and [Client B] (May 12 and 13, 2008). This act is considered a procedure on tissue below the dermis of a client, as stated by subsection 27(1) of the RHPA.

[The DOC] testified that the Member signed the Medication Administration Record Sheets (“MARS”) for [Client A] (April 26, 27, 29, June 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23 and 24, 2008) and [Client B] (May 10, 12 and 13, 2008). By doing so, the Member was documenting that she had administered insulin by subcutaneous injection to the [clients].

[An] expert witness [was tendered] by the College and qualified by the panel as an expert witness in controlled acts related to the practice of nursing. She testified that the act of taking blood sugar readings using a lancet to pierce the skin and obtain a blood sample, and the act of administering insulin by subcutaneous injection, were controlled acts contrary to subsection 27(1) of the RHPA. The Member was not authorized to perform either of these procedures because she was not considered a member of the profession since her membership was suspended, as per subsection 13(2) of the Code.

[The expert]’s testimony was considered to be clear, cogent and convincing. It was within the scope of her expertise and was substantiated by the wording of the legislation. Her opinion was accepted by the panel.

Final Submissions

College Counsel reviewed the evidence and submitted that the onus was on the College to prove the allegations on a balance of probabilities. She said the College had met its burden. In this case, the Member identified herself as an RPN after her suspension and continued to do so from 1996 until 2008. While suspended, she continued to present herself as an RPN, deceiving her employer. She provided her employer with three fraudulent Annual Payment Cards and performed controlled acts on [clients] at the facility.

Decision

The College bears the onus of proving the allegations in accordance with the standard of proof, based on the balance of probabilities and upon clear, cogent and convincing evidence.

Having considered the evidence and the onus and standard of proof, the panel finds that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4(a), (b), (c), 5, 6 (a), (b),(c), (d) and 7 (a), (b), (c) of the Amended Notice of Hearing. With respect to allegations 4 and 7, the Member engaged in conduct that would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional by continuing to use the RPN title after her suspension from the College from 1996 until 2008. The Member submitted fraudulent Annual Payment Cards from the College to her employer in 2003, 2004 and 2006, and performed controlled acts while not a member of the College.

Reasons for Decision

The panel relied on the clear, cogent, and convincing evidence led by the College. None of the witnesses had any personal interest in the outcome of the hearing. The clarity of the College’s evidence, as well as the credible and forthright manner of the witnesses, could only lead to one conclusion: findings of professional misconduct as set out in the Amended Notice of Hearing.

With regards to allegations # 4 (a), (b), (c), and 7 (a), (b), (c), the panel found that Member’s conduct would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession to be disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional. The Member’s conduct in this case involved ongoing deceit in presenting herself as an RPN to her employer from 1996 to 2008 while her certificate was suspended. The Member substantiated this deception by presenting fraudulent Annual Payment Cards from the College to her employer on three separate occasions. She also performed controlled acts on vulnerable [clients], contrary to the provisions of both the RHPA and the Nursing Act. The panel found that the Member’s actions showed flagrant disregard for the profession and the public trust.

Penalty Submissions

College Counsel initially requested that this panel make an Order as follows:

1. Requiring the Member to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three (3) months of the date of this Order.

2. Directing the Executive Director to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration for five (5) months. This suspension shall take effect from the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration.

3. Directing the Executive Director to impose the following terms, conditions and limitations on the Member’s certificate of registration:

a) The Member will attend two (2) sessions with a Nursing Expert (the “Expert”), at her own expense and within six (6) months of the date of this Order. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

i. The Expert has expertise in self-regulation, has been approved by the Director of Professional Conduct (the “Director”) in advance of the meetings, and has confirmed he/she will provide a report following the sessions;

ii. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. if available, a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons;

iii. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews the following College publications and completes the associated Reflective Questionnaires and online learning modules:

1. Professional Standards (Revised 2002), and

2. Legislation and Regulation, RHPA: Scope of Practice, Controlled Acts Model

iv. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of the completed Reflective Questionnaires and online participation forms;

v. The subject of the sessions with the Expert will include:

1. the acts or omissions for which the Member was found to have committed professional misconduct,

2. the potential consequences of the misconduct to the Member’s clients, colleagues, profession and self,

3. strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring,

4. the publications, questionnaires and modules set out above, and

5. the development of a learning plan in collaboration with the Expert;

vi. Within 30 days after the Member has completed the last session, the Expert forwards his/her report to the Director, in which the Expert will confirm:

1. the dates the Member attended the sessions,

2. that the Expert received the required documents from the Member,

3. that the Expert reviewed the required documents and subjects with the Member, and

4. the Expert’s assessment of the Member’s insight into her behaviour;

vii. If the Member does not comply with any of the requirements above, the Expert may cancel any session scheduled, even if that results in the Member breaching a term, condition or limitation[ ] on her certificate of registration;

b) For a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date the Member’s suspension ends, the Member will notify her employers of this decision. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

(i) The Director is notified of the name, address, and telephone number of all employer(s) within fourteen (14) days of commencing or resuming employment in any nursing position;

(ii) Provide her employer(s) with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons, once available;

(iii) Within fourteen (14) days of the commencement or resumption of the Member’s employment in any nursing position, the employer(s) forward(s) a report to the Director, in which it will confirm:

1. that it received a copy of the required documents, and

2. that [it] agrees to notify the Director immediately upon receipt of any information that the Member has breached the standards of practice of the profession; and

(iv) All documents delivered by the Member to the College, the Expert or the employer(s) will be made by verifiable method of delivery, the proof of which the Member will retain.

The panel had concerns that the initial order proposed by the College was not sufficient to ensure general deterrence and public protection, given this Member’s seeming lack of governability. In response to the panel’s concerns, the College revised its submissions and asked that the panel make an order as follows (with the amendments from the first proposed order underlined):

1. Requiring the Member to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three (3) months of the date of this Order.

2. Directing the Executive Director to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration until the Member completes all of the requirements set out in paragraph 3(a), but in any event for a minimum period of five (5) months. This suspension shall take effect from the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration.

3. Directing the Executive Director to impose the following terms, conditions and limitations on the Member’s certificate of registration:

a) The Member will attend two (2) sessions with a Nursing Expert (the “Expert”), at her own expense within three (3) months of the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

i. The Expert has expertise in self-regulation, has been approved by the Director of Professional Conduct (the “Director”) in advance of the meetings, and has confirmed he/she will provide a report following the sessions;

ii. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. if available, a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons;

iii. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews the following College publications and completes the associated Reflective Questionnaires and online learning modules:

1. Professional Standards (Revised 2002), and

2. Legislation and Regulation, RHPA: Scope of Practice, Controlled Acts Model

iv. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of the completed Reflective Questionnaires and online participation forms;

v. The subject of the sessions with the Expert will include:

1. the acts or omissions for which the Member was found to have committed professional misconduct,

2. the potential consequences of the misconduct to the Member’s clients, colleagues, profession and self,

3. strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring,

4. the publications, questionnaires and modules set out above, and

5. the development of a learning plan in collaboration with the Expert;

vi. Within 30 days after the Member has completed the last session, the Expert forwards his/her report to the Director, in which the Expert will confirm:

1. the dates the Member attended the sessions,

2. that the Expert received the required documents from the Member,

3. that the Expert reviewed the required documents and subjects with the Member, and

4. the Expert’s assessment of the Member’s insight into her behaviour;

vii. If the Member does not comply with any of the requirements above, the Expert may cancel any session scheduled, even if that results in the Member breaching a term, condition or limitations on her certificate of registration or extending the period of her suspension;

b) For a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date the Member’s suspension ends, the Member will notify her employers of this decision. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

(i) The Director is notified of the name, address, and telephone number of all employer(s) within fourteen (14) days of commencing or resuming employment in any nursing position;

(ii) Provide her employer(s) with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons, once available;

(iii) Within fourteen (14) days of the commencement or resumption of the Member’s employment in any nursing position, the employer(s) forward(s) a report to the Director, in which it will confirm:

1. that it received a copy of the required documents, and

2. that [it] agrees to notify the Director immediately upon receipt of any information that the Member has breached the standards of practice of the profession; and

(iv) All documents delivered by the Member to the College, the Expert or the employer(s) will be made by verifiable method of delivery, the proof of which the Member will retain.

Penalty Decision

The panel makes the following order as to penalty:

1. The Member is required to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three (3) months of the date of this Order.

2. The Executive Director is directed to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration until the Member completes all of the requirements set out in paragraph 3(a), but in any event for a minimum period of five (5) months. This suspension shall take effect from the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration.

3. The Executive Director is directed to impose the following terms, conditions and limitations on the Member’s certificate of registration:

a) The Member will attend two (2) sessions with a Nursing Expert (the “Expert”), at her own expense within three (3) months of the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

i. The Expert has expertise in self-regulation, has been approved by the Director of Professional Conduct (the “Director”) in advance of the meetings, and has confirmed he/she will provide a report following the sessions;

ii. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. if available, a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons;

iii. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews the following College publications and completes the associated Reflective Questionnaires and online learning modules:

1. Professional Standards (Revised 2002), and

2. Legislation and Regulation, RHPA: Scope of Practice, Controlled Acts Model

iv. At least [seven] (7) days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of the completed Reflective Questionnaires and online participation forms;

v. The subject of the sessions with the Expert will include:

1. the acts or omissions for which the Member was found to have committed professional misconduct,

2. the potential consequences of the misconduct to the Member’s clients, colleagues, profession and self,

3. strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring,

4. the publications, questionnaires and modules set out above, and

5. the development of a learning plan in collaboration with the Expert;

vi. Within [thirty] (30) days after the Member has completed the last session, the Expert forwards his/her report to the Director, in which the Expert will confirm:

1. the dates the Member attended the sessions,

2. that the Expert received the required documents from the Member,

3. that the Expert reviewed the required documents and subjects with the Member, and

4. the Expert’s assessment of the Member’s insight into her behaviour;

vii. If the Member does not comply with any of the requirements above, the Expert may cancel any session scheduled, even if that results in the Member breaching a term, condition or limitation[ ] on her certificate of registration or extending the period of her suspension;

b) For a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date the Member’s suspension ends, the Member will notify her employers of this decision. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

(i) The Director is notified of the name, address, and telephone number of all employer(s) within fourteen (14) days of commencing or resuming employment in any nursing position;

(ii) Provide her employer(s) with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing, and

3. a copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons, once available;

(iii) Within fourteen (14) days of the commencement or resumption of the Member’s employment in any nursing position, the employer(s) forward(s) a report to the Director, in which it will confirm:

1. that it received a copy of the required documents, and

2. that [it] agrees to notify the Director immediately upon receipt of any information that the Member has breached the standards of practice of the profession; and

(iv) All documents delivered by the Member to the College, the Expert or the employer(s) will be made by verifiable method of delivery, the proof of which the Member will retain.

Reasons for Penalty Decision

The panel considered the various aggravating and mitigating factors. Aggravating factors included that the Member submitted documents that she would have known were fraudulent. The Member presented herself to her employer as a RPN for a period of 12 years while suspended from the College. She performed controlled acts on a vulnerable population on numerous occasions, while prohibited from doing so. Her actions jeopardized her employer, from a liability standpoint, in that the employer was not meeting the legislated requirement of having a registered staff member on duty at all times. The mitigating factors were that the Member had no prior disciplinary history with the College and no [clients] were harmed.

This penalty meets the goal of protecting the public by ensuring that the Member is rehabilitated through the terms, conditions and limitations imposed. It emphasizes to the Member, and the membership at large, the importance of participating effectively in self-regulation of the profession. It increases the accountability of the Member to her employers and to the College.

The panel found that a suspension was necessary to ensure that the Member and the membership understand that providing false or misleading information to employers regarding membership will not be tolerated.

After reviewing other cases of a similar nature, the panel determined that a five-month suspension was within an appropriate range. The panel determined that the suspension, which will be a minimum of five months but will otherwise last until the Member complies with section 3(a) of the order, will demonstrate the Member’s commitment to the profession and future governability.

The goals of remediation and rehabilitation are met through the specific conditions required before the Member meets with the Nursing expert.

I, Angela Verrier, RPN, 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: ____________________________

Panel Members:

Spencer Dickson, RN

Kim Jinkerson, RPN

John Bald, Public Member

Gino Cucchi, Public Member