DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO
PANEL: Terry Holland, RPN Chairperson Deborah Graystone, NP Member Mary MacMillan-Gilkinson Public Member Sherry Szucsko-Bedard, RN Member Christopher Woodbury Public Member
BETWEEN:
COLLEGE OF NURSES OF ONTARIO MEGAN SHORTREED for College of Nurses of Ontario
- and -
NICOLE PROULX Registration No. AD078357 NO REPRESENTATION for Nicole Proulx
CHRISTOPHER WIRTH Independent Legal Counsel
Heard: July 22, 2019
DECISION AND REASONS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the "Panel") on July 22, 2019 at the College of Nurses of Ontario (the "College") at Toronto.
Nicole Proulx, (the "Member") was present and not represented.
Publication Ban
College Counsel brought a motion pursuant to s.45(3) of the Health Professions Procedural Code of the Nursing Act, 1991, for an order preventing the public disclosure of the names and clients identifying information referred to orally or in any documents presented in the Discipline hearing of the Member or any information that could disclose the identity of the clients, including a ban on the publication or broadcasting of this information.
The Panel considered the submissions of the Parties and decided that there be an order preventing the public disclosure of the names of the clients referred to orally or in any documents presented in the Discipline hearing of the Member or any information that could disclose the identity of the clients, including a ban on the publication or broadcasting of this information.
The Allegations
College Counsel advised the Panel that the College was requesting leave to withdraw the allegations set out in paragraphs 1(d); 3(a) and 4(d) of the Notice of Hearing dated May 30, 2019. The Panel granted this request. The remaining allegations against the Member are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED THAT:
- 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(1) of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that, while working as a Registered Practical Nurse at Pioneer Manor in Sudbury, Ontario (the "Facility"), you contravened a standard of practice of the profession or failed to meet the standards of practice of the profession, as follows:
a. in 2017, you used your cell phone to video a client, [Client A], in a behavioural state, without [Client A]'s knowledge or consent, and then shared the video with a co-worker through a social media application; and/or
b. in 2017, you used your cell phone to take photographs of clients' feces, and then shared these photographs with co-workers through a social media application; and/or
c. in 2017, you used your cell phone to take a photograph of a wall where a client had pulled down wall panelling, and then shared this photograph with a co-worker through a social media application; and/or
d. [withdrawn];
- 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(7) of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that, while working as a Registered Practical Nurse at the Facility, you abused a client verbally, physically or emotionally, as follows:
a. In 2017, you used your cell phone to video a client, [Client A], in a behavioural state, without [Client A]'s knowledge or consent, and then shared the video with a co-worker through a social media application; and/or
[withdrawn];
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, while employed as a Registered Practical Nurse at the Facility, 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, as follows:
a. in 2017, you used your cell phone to video a client, [Client A], in a behavioural state, without [Client A]'s knowledge or consent, and then shared the video with a co-worker through a social media application; and/or
b. in 2017, you used your cell phone to take photographs of clients' feces, and then shared these photographs with co-workers through a social media application; and/or
c. in 2017, you used your cell phone to take a photograph of a wall where a client had pulled down wall panelling, and then shared this photograph with a co-worker through a social media application; and/or
d. [withdrawn];
- 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(15) of Ontario Regulation 799/93, in that, when applying for employment as a Registered Practical Nurse at Elizabeth Centre in Sudbury, Ontario, you signed or issued, in your professional capacity, a document that you knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement, as follows:
a. in August 2017, you submitted a resume to Elizabeth Centre stating that your employment as an RPN at the Facility had ended in September 2016, when in fact your employment had ended in June 2017; and/or
b. in August 2017, you submitted a job application to Elizabeth Centre stating that your employment as an RPN at the Facility had ended in October 2016, and listing the reason for leaving employment as "son", when in fact your employment had ended in June 2017 as a result of the Facility terminating your employment for misconduct; and/or
- 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, when applying for employment as a Registered Practical Nurse at Elizabeth Centre in Sudbury, 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, as follows:
a. in August 2017, you submitted a resume to Elizabeth Centre stating that your employment as an RPN at the Facility had ended in September 2016, when in fact your employment had ended in June 2017; and/or
b. in August 2017, you submitted a job application to Elizabeth Centre stating that your employment as an RPN at the Facility had ended in October 2016, and listing the reason for leaving employment as "son", when in fact your employment had ended in June 2017 as a result of the Facility terminating your employment for misconduct.
Member's Plea
The Member admitted the allegations set out in paragraphs 1(a), (b), (c); 2(a); 4(a), (b), (c); 5(a), (b) and 6(a), (b) in the Notice of Hearing. 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, unedited, as follows:
THE MEMBER
Nicole Proulx (the "Member") obtained a diploma in nursing from Collège Boréal in 2014.
The Member registered with the College of Nurses of Ontario ("CNO") as a Registered Practical Nurse ("RPN") on November 4, 2014. On January 18, 2019, the Member moved into the Non-Practising Class, and remains in that class to date.
The Member was employed at Pioneer Manor, a long-term care facility in Sudbury, Ontario, from June 15, 2014 to June 23, 2017, when her employment was terminated as a result of the conduct described below.
The Member was subsequently employed at Elizabeth Centre, a long-term care facility in Sudbury, Ontario, from August 29, 2017 to September 11, 2017, when her employment was terminated for poor performance.
INCIDENTS RELEVANT TO ALLEGATIONS OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
Pioneer Manor – Taking and Sharing Videos/Photos Relating to [Clients]
In the spring of 2017, the Member used her cellular phone to take a video of [Client A] in a "behavioural state" (i.e. rolling on the floor, licking and/or wiping the floor). The video was filmed without the knowledge or consent of [Client] A. The Member sent the video to a co-worker, [Co-worker A], using the "Snapchat" application.
On two separate occasions in the spring of 2017, the Member sent photographs of [clients'] feces to co-workers via Snapchat.
On the first occasion, the Member took a photograph of a [client's] feces on the floor and sent this photograph to a co-worker, [Co-worker A] (a PSW), via Snapchat, having written the caption "guess who" on the photograph.
On another occasion, the Member took a photograph of her co-worker, [Co-worker B] (a PSW), holding a [client's] feces that she was cleaning up in a bathroom. The Member sent the photograph to one or more other co-workers on Snapchat.
In the spring of 2017, the Member took a photograph of damage to a countertop and wall panel caused by a [client]], and sent the photograph to her co-worker, [Co-worker A] (a PSW), via Snapchat. The Member later told [Co-worker A] in person that a particular [client] had caused the damage.
If the Member were to testify, she would say that she and other staff were sharing photos on Snapchat because they were frustrated due to short staffing. However, the Member acknowledges that her conduct was not an effective manner in which to advocate for a quality practice setting, and that she ought to have discussed resource allocation issues with the appropriate authority.
The Member admits that by taking and circulating photos of a [client] in distress, and of damage and soiling caused by [clients], she engaged in conduct that did not demonstrate respect or empathy for [clients]. To the contrary, the Member portrayed and discussed [clients] in a manner that was humiliating and denigrating, and which may have encouraged subordinate staff (PSWs) to engage in similar conduct.
In doing so, the Member admits that she breached the standards of practice of the profession, and in particular:
CNO's Professional Standards of accountability, ethics, leadership, and maintaining therapeutic nurse-client relationships. This standard provides that nurses are "accountable for conducting themselves in ways that promote respect for the profession". Ethical nursing care requires "promoting the values of client well-being,… assuring privacy and confidentiality, respecting the sanctity and quality of life, maintaining commitments…" and "acting with integrity, honesty and professionalism". Nurses should be role models to unregulated staff by "role-modelling professional values, beliefs and attributes". Further, "Each nurse establishes and maintains respectful, collaborative, therapeutic and professional relationships." Nurses do so by "demonstrating respect and empathy for, and interest in clients" and recognizing and preventing client abuse; and
CNO's Ethics practice standard, which requires nurses to demonstrate values of client well-being, privacy, respect for life and quality of life, and maintaining commitments to clients. This standard requires nurses to use "their knowledge and skill to promote clients' best interests in an empathic manner", and to promote and preserve "the self-esteem and self-confidence of clients". Further, "Nurses need to provide care that maintains the dignity and privacy of clients and should not unnecessarily intrude on a client's privacy" and must protect "clients' physical and emotional privacy". "Nurses are obliged to refrain from abandoning, abusing or neglecting clients, and to provide empathic and knowledgeable care."
The Member also admits that her conduct in taking and circulating these photos was relevant to the practice of nursing and would reasonably be regarded by members as dishonourable and unprofessional. The conduct not only violated the professional standards required of nurses, the Member knew or ought to have known that it was wrong and would bring shame on the profession.
With respect to taking and sharing the photo of [Client] A in a behavioural state, the Member admits that was emotional abuse, as it breached the [client's] right to privacy and dignity.
Elizabeth Centre – Falsifying Job Application Documents
The photo-sharing incidents at Pioneer Manor were reported in the Sudbury media in June 2017, including the fact that 5 Pioneer Manor staff were fired after "inappropriate Snapchats" involving sharing photographs of vulnerable residents. Elizabeth Centre was therefore aware of the incidents, but not the individuals involved.
After her termination from employment at Pioneer Manor, the Member applied for employment at Elizabeth Centre in August 2017. As part of her application, she submitted a cover letter, resume, and job application.
The Member intentionally and falsely stated on her resume and job application to Elizabeth Centre that the end date of her employment at Pioneer Manor was September 2016, when it was actually June 23, 2017.
On her resume, the Member listed that she was employed at Pioneer Manor from "November 2014-October 2016". On her job application, she listed having been employed at Pioneer Manor from November 2014-October 2016 and indicated that her reason for leaving her employment at Pioneer Manor was "son", when in fact her employment had ended in June 2017 as a result of Pioneer Manor terminating her employment for misconduct.
If the Member were to testify, she would say that she was under financial pressure to support her child, and exercised poor judgment with respect to misleading the Elizabeth Centre.
The Member admits that she falsified her resume and application to Elizabeth Centre to avoid being connected to the incidents described above. In doing so, she admits that she signed or issued, in her professional capacity, a document that she knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement.
The Member also admits that her conduct in falsifying her resume and application was relevant to the practice of nursing and would reasonably be regarded by members as dishonourable and unprofessional. The conduct not only violated the professional standards required of nurses to act with honesty and integrity, the Member knew or ought to have known that it was dishonest and would bring shame on the profession.
ADMISSIONS OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
The Member admits that she committed the acts of professional misconduct as alleged in paragraphs 1(a)-(c), 2(a), and 4(a)-(c) of the Notice of Hearing, as described in paragraphs 5-14 above.
The Member also admits that she committed the acts of professional misconduct as alleged in paragraphs 5(a) and (b), and 6(a) and (b) of the Notice of Hearing, as described in paragraphs 15-21 above.
With respect to allegations 4(a)-(c) and 6(a)-(b), the Member admits that her conduct was dishonourable and unprofessional.
With leave of the Discipline Committee, CNO withdraws the following allegations in the Notice of Hearing:
1(d);
3(a); and
4(d).
- The Member acknowledges that she has had the opportunity to receive independent legal advice and was encouraged to do so by the College. She further acknowledges that she is entering into this Agreed Statement of Facts freely and voluntarily, without compulsion or duress, and after having had ample opportunity to consult with legal counsel if she so wished.
Decision
The College bears the onus of proving the allegations in accordance with the standard of proof, that being the balance of probabilities based 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(a), (b) and (c), 5(a) and (b) of the Notice of Hearing. As to allegation 2(a), the Panel finds that the Member emotionally abused [Client] A. As to allegations 4(a), (b) and (c), 6(a) and (b), the Panel finds that the Member engaged in conduct that would reasonably be considered by members to be dishonourable and unprofessional.
Reasons for Decision
The Panel considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and the Member's plea and finds that this evidence supports findings of professional misconduct as alleged in the Notice of Hearing.
Allegation 1 in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 22 in the Agreed Statement of Facts. The Member has admitted that she took a video of Client A in a "behavioural state" and shared it with a colleague on "Snapchat" which is a social media platform. The Member further admitted taking photographs of clients, and of information personal to clients, and sharing them on "Snapchat" with colleagues. These include photographs of clients' feces and photographs of damage caused by a client. The Member has admitted that she also shared a picture on "Snapchat" of a PSW colleague holding a client's feces. This conduct is in clear violation of the College's standards as set out in two documents: Professional Standards and Ethics. The Member has failed to act in a manner that maintains the "dignity and privacy" of those whose care has been entrusted to her. In addition to sharing private photographs and a video with unregulated staff, the Member has also neglected her duty to act as a role model by speaking to them about her clients in a manner that was humiliating and denigrating. The Member's conduct clearly lacked professionalism, empathy and respect.
Allegation 2 in the Notice of Hearing is supported by paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 22 in the Agreed Statement of Facts. The Member has admitted that her conduct constituted emotional abuse when she shared a video on a social media application showing a client out of control (i.e. rolling on the floor, licking and/or wiping the floor). This is a breach of the College's Ethics Standards as a nurse is required to preserve "the self-esteem" of clients. It is also a breach of the College's Professional Standards as a nurse is expected to prevent client abuse and maintain a client's privacy and dignity.
With respect to Allegations 4(a) and (b), the Panel finds that the Member's conduct was unprofessional as it demonstrated a serious and persistent disregard for her professional obligations when she breached her clients' privacy on multiple occasions. Her conduct was dishonourable as it fell well below the standards of a professional when she denigrated and humiliated vulnerable clients by her comments and by sharing their private and most embarrassing moments on "Snapchat".
Allegations 5(a) and (b) are supported by paragraphs 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 23 in the Agreed Statement of Facts. The Member admits that she falsely provided an incorrect end date of employment for Pioneer Manor on her resume and job application to Elizabeth Centre. The Member's conduct was intentional as her goal was to disassociate herself from the incidents at Pioneer Manor that had resulted in her termination. The College's Professional Standards states the importance of "acting with integrity, honesty and professionalism".
With respect to Allegations 6 (a) and (b), the Panel finds that the Member's conduct was unprofessional as it showed a serious disregard for her professional obligation to act with integrity and honesty. The Member's deliberate act of misrepresenting her employment history on her resume and job application is also dishonourable and falls well below the standards of a professional.
Penalty
College Counsel and the Member advised the Panel that a Joint Submission on Order had been agreed upon. The Joint Submission on Order requests that this Panel make an order as follows:
Requiring the Member to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three months of the date that this Order becomes final.
Directing the Executive Director to suspend the Member's certificate of registration for a period of 5 months. This suspension shall take effect from the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration and shall continue to run without interruption as long as the Member remains in the practising class.
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 meetings with a Regulatory Expert (the "Expert"), at her own expense and within 6 months from 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 nursing regulation and has been approved by the Director of Professional Conduct (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:
the Panel's Order,
the Notice of Hearing,
the Agreed Statement of Facts,
this Joint Submission on Order, and
if available, a copy of the Panel's Decision and Reasons;
iii. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews the following CNO publications and completes the associated Reflective Questionnaires, online learning modules, decision tools and online participation forms (where applicable):
Professional Standards,
Ethics, and
Code of Conduct.
iv. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews and completes CNO's self-directed learning package, One is One Too Many, at her own expense, including the self-directed Nurses' Workbook;
v. At least seven days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of the completed Reflective Questionnaires, online participation forms and Nurses' Workbook;
vi. The subject of the sessions with the Expert will include:
the acts or omissions for which the Member was found to have committed professional misconduct,
the potential consequences of the misconduct to the Member's clients, colleagues, profession and self,
strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring,
the publications, questionnaires and modules set out above, and
the development of a learning plan in collaboration with the Expert;
vii. 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:
the dates the Member attended the sessions,
that the Expert received the required documents from the Member,
that the Expert reviewed the required documents and subjects with the Member, and
the Expert's assessment of the Member's insight into her behaviour; and
viii. 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 her certificate of registration.
b) For a period of 18 months from the date the Member's suspension ends, the Member will notify her 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 her employer(s) with a copy of:
the Panel's Order,
the Notice of Hearing,
the Agreed Statement of Facts,
this Joint Submission on Order, and
a copy of the Panel's Decision and Reasons, once available; and
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:
that they received a copy of the required documents, and
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.
All documents delivered by the Member to CNO, the Expert or the employer(s) will be delivered by verifiable method, the proof of which the Member will retain.
Penalty Submissions
College Counsel submitted that:
The mitigating factors in this case were:
The Member has no prior history with the College;
The Member has cooperated with the College and made admissions of misconduct;
The Member's expressions of remorse indicate that she is open to remediation.
The aggravating factors in this case were:
That the Member engaged in two different types of misconduct: emotional abuse of a client and the dishonest act of falsifying documents;
That the Member engaged in four inappropriate incidents when she shared undignified photographs, via "Snapchat" with her health care team, relating to her clients;
That the Member captioned one of the degrading photographs with the words "guess who";
That the Member's shared photos and video had an element of blaming clients;
That the Member did not provide good role modeling to colleagues subordinate to her;
After the Member sent her colleague a photograph of damage caused by a client, she followed up by telling her colleague the name of the client;
The Member falsified statements on her resume and job application to avoid being identified as one of the individuals fired as a result of the incidents at Pioneer Manor.
The proposed penalty provides for general deterrence through the Member's five month suspension and the terms, conditions and limitations placed on her certificate of registration.
The proposed penalty provides for specific deterrence through the suspension, the oral reprimand and the terms, conditions and limitations placed on her certificate of registration.
The proposed penalty provides for remediation and rehabilitation through the oral reprimand, the two meetings with a Regulatory Expert and the review of the College's documents.
Overall, the public is protected because during the Member's suspension she will be required to update her skills and knowledge by meeting two times with a Regulatory Expert, by reading three College standards and by completing the self-directed learning package, One is One Too Many. The Member will also be required to notify her employers of this decision for a period of 18 months.
College Counsel submitted two cases to the Panel to demonstrate that the proposed penalty fell within the range of similar cases from this Discipline Committee. College Counsel submitted that no cases are the same and that each penalty is individually crafted. She stated that the Member and the College agree that the 5 month suspension and the 18 month employer notification requirement are appropriate in the circumstances of this case.
CNO v. Susan Jane Daines (Discipline Committee, 2013). The member did not attend the hearing. This case involves two allegations: emotional abuse and falsifying a letter of reference. The emotional abuse involved the member pouring milk over a resident. The member was found to have falsified a letter of reference. In addition, the member put forward the purported writer's name as a reference. The member was given a 5 month suspension and 24 months of employer notification.
CNO v. Sasha Lauzon (Discipline Committee, 2017). This case proceeded as an Agreed Statement of Facts. It involved abuse of a client. There were no falsifications of documents. The member, in this case, was found guilty in criminal court of the assault of a former client. The member admitted that this conviction was relevant to her suitability to practise nursing. This case involved a single incident of physical abuse. The member received a 3 month suspension and a 12 month employer notification.
Submissions were made by the Member. She stated that she now knows that her actions were "wrong". She said that when she sent out the pictures and videos, it was not done in a "mean way". Her intentions were to show that the residents' needs were not being met. She said that she now realizes that she should have expressed her frustration in a safe manner. The Member stated that if she had the opportunity, she would apologize to the resident and to her family. The Member stated that she had been working in an area of nursing that she loved.
Penalty Decision
The Panel accepts the Joint Submission on Order and accordingly orders:
The Member is required to appear before the Panel to be reprimanded within three months of the date that this Order becomes final.
The Executive Director is directed to suspend the Member's certificate of registration for a period of 5 months. This suspension shall take effect from the date the Member obtains an active certificate of registration and shall continue to run without interruption as long as the Member remains in the practising class.
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 meetings with a Regulatory Expert (the "Expert"), at her own expense and within 6 months from 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 nursing regulation and has been approved by the Director of Professional Conduct (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:
the Panel's Order,
the Notice of Hearing,
the Agreed Statement of Facts,
this Joint Submission on Order, and
if available, a copy of the Panel's Decision and Reasons;
iii. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews the following CNO publications and completes the associated Reflective Questionnaires, online learning modules, decision tools and online participation forms (where applicable):
Professional Standards,
Ethics, and
Code of Conduct.
iv. Before the first meeting, the Member reviews and completes CNO's self-directed learning package, One is One Too Many, at her own expense, including the self-directed Nurses' Workbook;
v. At least seven days before the first meeting, the Member provides the Expert with a copy of the completed Reflective Questionnaires, online participation forms and Nurses' Workbook;
vi. The subject of the sessions with the Expert will include:
the acts or omissions for which the Member was found to have committed professional misconduct,
the potential consequences of the misconduct to the Member's clients, colleagues, profession and self,
strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring,
the publications, questionnaires and modules set out above, and
the development of a learning plan in collaboration with the Expert;
vii. 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:
the dates the Member attended the sessions,
that the Expert received the required documents from the Member,
that the Expert reviewed the required documents and subjects with the Member, and
the Expert's assessment of the Member's insight into her behaviour; and
viii. 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 her certificate of registration.
b) For a period of 18 months from the date the Member's suspension ends, the Member will notify her 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 her employer(s) with a copy of:
the Panel's Order,
the Notice of Hearing,
the Agreed Statement of Facts,
this Joint Submission on Order, and
a copy of the Panel's Decision and Reasons, once available; and
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:
that they received a copy of the required documents, and
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.
All documents delivered by the Member to CNO, 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 understands that the penalty ordered should protect the public and enhance public confidence in the ability of the College to regulate nurses. This is achieved through a penalty that addresses specific deterrence, general deterrence and, where appropriate, rehabilitation and remediation. The Panel also considered the penalty in light of the principle that joint submissions should not be interfered with lightly.
The Panel concluded that the proposed penalty is reasonable and in the public interest. The Member has co-operated with the College and, by agreeing to the facts and a proposed penalty, has accepted responsibility. The Panel finds that the penalty satisfies the principles of specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation and remediation, and public protection. Members of the profession will be reminded of the importance of maintaining the privacy and confidentiality of all their clients. They will also be reminded of the hazards that can potentially arise through the use of social media. Members of the profession will be cautioned against deliberately submitting any misinformation on an application or a resume.
The penalty is in line with what has been ordered in previous cases.
I, Terry Holland, 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.