College of Nurses of Ontario v. Victor Manzano III, 2016 CanLII 102077

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO

PANEL: CATHY EGERTON, Public Member Chairperson RENATE DAVIDSON, Public Member SHIRAZ IRANI, RN Member DESIREE-ANN PRILLO, RPN Member GEORGE RUDANYCZ, RN Member

BETWEEN:

COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO ) JEAN-CLAUDE KILLEY for ) College of Nurses of Ontario

• and - )

VICTOR MANZANO III ) LAMBERT KWOK for Registration No. JF655381 ) Victor Manzano III

) Heard: July 14, 2016

DECISION AND REASONS

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee on July 14, 2016, at the College of Nurses of Ontario (the “College”) at Toronto.

The Allegations

Counsel for the College advised the panel that the College was requesting leave to withdraw the allegations set out in paragraph 3 of the Notice of Hearing dated 10 of June, 2016. The panel granted this request. The remaining allegations against Victor Manzano III were as follows.

IT IS ALLEGED THAT:

1. You have committed an act of professional misconduct as provided by subsection 51(1)(a) of the Health Professions Procedural Code of the Nursing Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 32, as amended, in that you were found guilty of an offence relevant to your suitability to practice, and in particular, on or about August 28, 2014, you were found guilty of the following offences:

(a) possessing or using a credit card knowing it was obtained by commission of an offence in Canada, contrary to s. 342(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

i. February 16, 2013

ii. February 17, 2013

iii. February 28, 2013

iv. June 1, 2013

v. June 9, 2013

vi. June 14, 2013, and/or

vii. June 15, 2013

(b) fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

i. January 26, 2013

ii. February 19, 2013

iii. February 19, 2013 (2nd offence)

iv. March 3, 2013, and/or

v. June 19, 2013

(c) fraudulent use of a credit card, contrary to s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

i. January 28, 2013

(d) identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

i. January 26, 2013

ii. February 16, 2013

iii. February 28, 2013, and/or

iv. June 1, 2013;

2. 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(18) of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that you contravened a term, condition or limitation on your certificate of registration, and in particular:

(a) you failed to provide the Executive Director the details of charges arising in Ontario relating to the following offences:

i. fraudulent use of a credit card, contrary to s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences allegedly committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge)

3. January 26, 2013 (3rd charge)

4. January 26, 2013 (4th charge)

5. January 28, 2013, and/or

6. January 28, 2013 (2nd charge)

ii. fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge), and/or

3. January 28, 2013

iii. identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge), and/or

3. January 28, 2013

(b) you failed to provide the Executive Director the details of findings of guilt arising in Ontario relating to the following offences:

i. possessing or using a credit card knowing it was obtained by commission of an offence in Canada, contrary to s. 342(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. February 16, 2013

2. February 17, 2013

3. February 28, 2013

4. June 1, 2013

5. June 9, 2013

6. June 14, 2013, and/or

7. June 15, 2013

ii. fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. February 19, 2013

3. February 19, 2013 (2nd offence)

4. March 3, 2013, and/or

5. June 19, 2013

iii. fraudulent use of a credit card, contrary to s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 28, 2013

iv. identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. February 16, 2013

3. February 28, 2013, and/or

4. June 1, 2013;

5. Withdrawn;

6. 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 you engaged in conduct or performed an act, relevant to the practice or nursing, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, and in particular:

(a) you failed to provide the Executive Director the details of charges arising in Ontario relating to the following offences:

i. fraudulent use of a credit card, contrary to s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences allegedly committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge)

3. January 26, 2013 (3rd charge)

4. January 26, 2013 (4th charge)

5. January 28, 2013, and/or

6. January 28, 2013 (2nd charge)

ii. fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge), and/or

3. January 28, 2013

iii. identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. January 26, 2013 (2nd charge), and/or

3. January 28, 2013

(b) you failed to provide the Executive Director the details of findings of guilt arising in Ontario relating to the following offences:

i. possessing or using a credit card knowing it was obtained by commission of an offence in Canada, contrary to s. 342(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. February 16, 2013

2. February 17, 2013

3. February 28, 2013

4. June 1, 2013

5. June 9, 2013

6. June 14, 2013, and/or

7. June 15, 2013

ii. fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. February 19, 2013

3. February 19, 2013 (2nd offence)

4. March 3, 2013, and/or

5. June 19, 2013

iii. fraudulent use of a credit card, contrary to s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 28, 2013

iv. identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code, relating to offences committed on or about the following dates:

1. January 26, 2013

2. February 16, 2013

3. February 28, 2013, and/or

4. June 1, 2013;

Member’s Plea

The Member admitted the allegations set out in the Notice of Hearing at paragraphs:

• 1 (a), (b), (c), (d):

• 2 (a),(b)

• 4 (a),(b), in that the conduct was unprofessional

The panel received a written plea inquiry which was signed by the Member. The panel also conducted an oral plea inquiry and was satisfied that the Member’s admission was voluntary, informed and unequivocal.

Agreed Statement of Facts

Counsel for the College and the Member advised the panel that agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts, which reads as follows.

THE MEMBER

1. Victor Manzano III (the “Member”) obtained a diploma in nursing [ ] in 2005.

2. The Member registered with the College of Nurses of Ontario (the “College”) as a Registered Practical Nurse (“RPN”) in the General Class in March 2006. The Member’s certificate of registration was interim suspended by the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee as of February 17, 2016.

3. The Member was employed by [Facility A] as a part-time RPN between approximately 2006 and 2013 [ ].

4. The Member was employed by [Facility B] since approximately April 2007 as a full-time RPN. His employment was terminated in approximately February 2016.

INCIDENTS RELEVANT TO ALLEGATIONS OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT

The Member’s Criminal Charges and Convictions

5. On August 22, 2013, the Member was charged with 52 criminal charges (the “First Information”) related to having stolen credit cards from four clients at [Facility A] and either using them or attempting to use them to make purchases between February 16 and June 19, 2013.

6. On April 23, 2014, the Member was charged with 12 further criminal charges (the “Second Information”) related to having stolen a credit card from one client at [Facility B] and unsuccessfully attempting to use it to make purchases between January 26 and 28, 2013.

7. On August 28, 2014, the Member pled guilty to and was found guilty of 14 charges from the First Information and three charges from the Second Information. This resulted in a finding of guilt for the following charges:

• Four counts of fraud or attempted fraud under $5,000, contrary to s. 380(1) of the Criminal Code;

• Five counts of identity theft, contrary to s. 402.2(1) of the Criminal Code;

• Eight counts of possession/use of a stolen credit card, contrary to s. 342(1)(c)(i) or s. 342(3) of the Criminal Code

8. The remaining charges were withdrawn.

9. The total loss suffered was $3,601.15.

[Facility] A

10. The Member originally worked as a nurse at the inpatient rehabilitation unit.

11. [Client 1], [Client 2], [Client 3] and [Client 4] were all clients of [Facility A] and were all cared for by the Member during their hospitalization. They were between 78 and 91 years of age at the time.

12. The Member obtained possession of [Client 1’s] [ ] Visa Card without her knowledge or consent and either made or attempted to make purchases without her knowledge or consent on February 16, 17 and 19, 2013.

13. The Member made online purchases totalling under $650 [ ]. He also attempted to make approximately $5,500 of online purchases from [electronics stores] using a fraudulent email.

14. If the Member were to testify, he would say that although the merchandise from [the electronics stores] was delivered to the Member’s residence, the Member refused the items and returned them. As a result, [Client 1] did not suffer any loss associated with the attempted purchases at [the electronics stores].

15. On February 28, 2013, the Member was in possession of a [ ] MasterCard belonging to [Client 2] without her knowledge or consent. He purchased $900 worth of [ ] gift cards using a fraudulent email address.

16. If the Member were to testify, he would say that although the gift cards were delivered to the Member, the Member refused the gift cards and returned them, and [Client 2] suffered no loss in this regard.

17. On March 2 and 3, 2013, while the Member was a guest of [a hotel], he was in possession of [Client 3’s] [ ] Visa Card without her knowledge or consent. He used [Client 3’s] credit card to make fraudulent purchases totalling approximately $100 through online purchases [ ].

18. On June 1 and 9, 2013, the Member had possession of [Client 4’s] [ ] MasterCard without her knowledge or consent. He used [Client 4’s] MasterCard to make fraudulent online purchases [ ] totalling $975.75. If the Member were to testify, he would say that these purchases were for food coupons for a grocery store.

19. The Member made further fraudulent online purchases [ ] on June 14, 15 and 19, 2013 totalling $1,250 using [Client 4’s] MasterCard.

[Facility] B

20. As of January 9, 2012, the Member worked on the cardiovascular unit. Prior to this, the Member worked day, weekend and night shifts on various units.

21. [Client 5] was a client of [Facility B] and the Member was assigned to care for her on January 26 and 28, 2013. The Member fraudulently obtained possession of [Client 5’s] [ ] Visa Card, her [ ] MasterCard and her American Express credit card number.

22. On January 26, 2013, the Member created a fictitious email account and attempted to make a purchase of $4,260.25 [ ] on the Visa and a purchase of $2,326.67 [ ] on the MasterCard, to be shipped to the Member’s address under [Client 5’s] name.

23. On January 28, 2013, the Member tried to make an online purchase [ ] of $4,221.42.

24. None of the attempts by the Member to purchase items with [Client 5’s] credit cards were successful and the transactions were declined. As a result, no loss was suffered by [Client 5].

Sentencing

25. The Member made full restitution of the $3,601.15 to the financial institutions that suffered the loss as a result of the Member’s conduct.

26. If the Member were to testify, he would say that he has completed 200 hours of upfront community service.

27. On May 14, 2015, the Member was sentenced to ten months in custody, to be served as a conditional sentence, and 36 months of probation. The Member was also required to pay a victim fine surcharge of $800.

28. One of the conditions of both the Member’s conditional sentence and probation order prohibits the Member from working or acting in any position of trust or in any type of nursing or caregiver role (with the exception for family members) unless he discloses his criminal record and the nature of it to his employer prior to accepting any position.

29. The Member is currently serving his probation, which will be completed on February 13, 2019.

Failure to Self-Report

30. Although the Member failed to notify the College of the criminal charges in the First Information, the College became aware of them immediately when they were laid, and indicated this to the Member in a letter 5 days later notifying him of the appointment of an investigator into this matter.

31. The Member did not notify the College of the charges in the Second Information.

32. The Member also failed to report his 17 findings of guilt to the College.

33. If the Member were to testify he would say that he was awaiting the final disposition of all of his criminal matters before notifying the College. He admits, however, that he was required to inform the College of his new criminal charges (i.e. the charges in the Second Information) and his findings of guilt at the time that they happened, and not some time later such as after sentencing.

ADMISSIONS OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT

34. The Member admits that he was found guilty of offences on August 28, 2014, as described above, and that these findings of guilt are relevant to his suitability to practise.

35. The Member also admits that he failed to report the charges in the Second Information, as well as the findings of guilt resulting from both the First and Second Informations to the College. In particular, he admits that he contravened a term, condition or limitation on his certificate of registration contrary to s. 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 799/93.

36. Finally, the Member admits that failing to provide the Executive Director details of the charges from the Second Information and the findings of guilt arising from both the First and Second Informations would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as unprofessional.

37. As a result, the Member admits that he committed the acts of professional misconduct, as described in paragraphs 5 to 33 above, and as alleged in the following paragraphs in the Notice of Hearing:

• 1(a), (b), (c), (d);

• 2(a), (b); and

• 4(a), (b), in that the conduct was unprofessional.

OTHER

38. With leave of the Panel of the Discipline Committee, the College withdraws allegation 3 in the Notice of Hearing.

Decision

The panel considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct and, in particular, finds that the Member committed an act of professional misconduct as alleged in paragraphs 1 (a), (b), (c), (d); 2 (a), (b); and 4 (a), (b) in that the conduct would reasonably be considered by members of the profession to be unprofessional.

Reasons for Decision

The panel considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds this evidence supports findings of professional misconduct as alleged in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #1(a)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 12 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 12 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 15 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(iv) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 18 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(v) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 18 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(vi) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 19 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(a)(vii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 19 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(b)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 6 and 22 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(b)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 12 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(b)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 12 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(b)(iv) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 17 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(b)(v) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 19 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(c)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 6 and 23 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(d)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 21 and 22 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(d)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 12 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(d)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 15 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #1(d)(iv) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5 and 18 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(a)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 30, 31, 32 and 33 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(a)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 30, 31, 32 and 33 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(a)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 30, 31, 32 and 33 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(b)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 32, 34, 35 and 36 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(b)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 32, 34, 35 and 36 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(b)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 32,34 35 and 36 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

Allegation #2(b)(iv) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 32, 34, 35 and 36 in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Panel considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and finds that this evidence supports the findings that the conduct was unprofessional as alleged in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(a)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(a)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(a)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(b)(i) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(b)(ii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(b)(iii) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraph 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

Allegation #4(b)(iv) in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraph 34, 35 and 36 in the Notice of Hearing.

For allegation 4, the panel finds that the conduct admitted by the Member would reasonably be regarded as unprofessional in that it indicated a serious or persistent disregard for his professional obligations. In light of the Member’s admissions and the College’s acceptance of those admissions, the panel did not consider whether this conduct could also be considered dishonourable.

Penalty

Counsel for the College and the Member advised the panel that a Joint Submission on Order had been agreed upon. The Joint Submission requests that this panel make an order as follows.

1. Requiring the Member to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three months of the date that this Order becomes final.

2. Directing the Executive Director to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration for 12 months. This suspension shall take effect from the date that this Order becomes final and shall continue to run without interruption as long as the Member remains in the practising class.

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 a minimum of two meetings with a Nursing Expert (the “Expert”), at his own expense and within six months of the date of this Order. If the Expert determines that a greater number of sessions are required, the Expert will advise the Member and write to the Director of Professional Conduct (the “Director”) regarding the total number of sessions that are required and the length of time required to complete the additional sessions, but in any event, all sessions shall be completed within 18 months of the date of the Order. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

i. The Expert has expertise in nursing regulation and has been approved by the Director in advance of the meetings;

ii. At least seven days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing,

3. the Agreed Statement of Facts,

4. this Joint Submission on Order, and

5. 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, online learning modules and online participation forms (where applicable):

1. Professional Standards, and

2. Ethics;

iv. At least seven 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 Member will confirm that 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 his behaviour;

vii. If the Member does not comply with any one or more 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 his certificate of registration;

b) For a period of 24 months from the date the Member returns to the practice of nursing, the Member will notify his employers of the decision. To comply, the Member is required to:

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

ii. Provide his employer(s) with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing,

3. the Agreed Statement of Facts,

4. this Joint Submission on Order, and

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

iii. Ensure that within 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 they received a copy of the required documents, and

2. that they agree to notify the Director immediately upon receipt of any information that the Member has breached the standards of practice of the profession; and

c) The Member shall not practise independently in the community for a period of 24 months from the date the Member returns to the practice of nursing.

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

Penalty Submissions

Submissions were made by College Counsel and the Member’s Counsel.

The parties agreed that the mitigating factors in this case were that the Member has co-operated with the College and accepted responsibility by admitting to the allegations. The Member has no previous history of misconduct, has already served a 5-month suspension and has begun the process of rehabilitation through self-learning.

The aggravating factors in this case were that the offences occurred in two [facilities], involved five victims, and charges under the Criminal Code.

The proposed penalty provides for general deterrence and specific deterrence through a 12-month suspension of the Member’s certificate of registration and through a reprimand.

The proposed penalty provides for remediation and rehabilitation through the terms, conditions and limitations of the proposed penalty.

The parties submitted cases to the panel to demonstrate that the proposed penalty fell within the range of similar cases from this Discipline Committee and that the proposed penalty had provisions for general deterrence, specific deterrence, rehabilitation and remediation.

Counsel for the Member and Counsel for the College presented the panel with six cases to review in total, which included:

CNO v. Tracy Hare (Discipline Committee 2010);

CNO v. Moreblessing Kambarami, 2009 92086 (Discipline Committee 2009);

CNO v. Sherri MacKenzie (Discipline Committee 2011);

CNO v. Shirley Davis (Discipline Committee, 2000);

CNO v. Jillian Ghesquiere (Discipline Committee 2013); and

CNO v. Derrick Kent (Discipline Committee, 2015).

The panel reviewed these cases and found them to have relevancy to the case at hand. They showed that the proposed penalty is within the range set out in other cases with similar facts.

Penalty Decision

The panel accepts the Joint Submission as to Order and accordingly orders:

1. The Member is required to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three months of the date that this Order becomes final.

2. The Executive Director is directed to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration for 12 months. This suspension shall take effect from the date that this Order becomes final and shall continue to run without interruption as long as the Member remains in the practising class.

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 a minimum of two meetings with a Nursing Expert (the “Expert”), at his own expense and within six months of the date of this Order. If the Expert determines that a greater number of sessions are required, the Expert will advise the Member and write to the Director of Professional Conduct (the “Director”) regarding the total number of sessions that are required and the length of time required to complete the additional sessions, but in any event, all sessions shall be completed within 18 months of the date of the Order. To comply, the Member is required to ensure that:

i. The Expert has expertise in nursing regulation and has been approved by the Director in advance of the meetings;

ii. At least seven days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing,

3. the Agreed Statement of Facts,

4. this Joint Submission on Order, and

5. 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, online learning modules and online participation forms (where applicable):

1. Professional Standards, and

2. Ethics;

iv. At least seven 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 Member will confirm that 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 his behaviour;

vii. If the Member does not comply with any one or more 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 his certificate of registration;

b) For a period of 24 months from the date the Member returns to the practice of nursing, the Member will notify his employers of the decision. To comply, the Member is required to:

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

ii. Provide his employer(s) with a copy of:

1. the Panel’s Order,

2. the Notice of Hearing,

3. the Agreed Statement of Facts,

4. this Joint Submission on Order, and

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

iii. Ensure that within 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 they received a copy of the required documents, and

2. that they agree to notify the Director immediately upon receipt of any information that the Member has breached the standards of practice of the profession; and

c) The Member shall not practise independently in the community for a period of 24 months from the date the Member returns to the practice of nursing.

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

Reasons for Penalty Decision

The panel concluded that the parties’ Joint Submission on Order is in the public interest and provides both specific and general deterrence, as well as the opportunity for remediation of the Member’s practice. It is reasonable and is in the public interest. It is in line with what was ordered in similar cases that were presented to the panel.

The Member has co-operated with the College and in agreeing to the facts and the proposed penalty, has accepted responsibility for his actions. The penalty allows for specific deterrence in that it provides for an oral reprimand, suspension and remediation. It also provides for general deterrence in that it sends a clear message to the membership. It provides sufficient protection for the public and provides for remediation and monitoring.

I, Catherine Egerton, Public Member, 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:

Renate Davidson, Public Member

Shiraz Irani, RN

Desiree-Ann Prillo, RPN

George Rudanycz, RN