Commitment 5: In cases where a nurse, midwife or nursing associate was required to use their professional judgement we’ll respond proportionately
Sometimes problems in the working environment will be outside the nurse, midwife or nursing associate’s control. We'll take account of this. Examples include problems with systems, processes, equipment or staffing but could also involve issues about culture and leadership.
Where individuals are forced to make difficult choices, we'll focus on how they tried to escalate their concerns, if they did so before the incident or after, and how they exercised their professional judgement with reference to the Code.
Examples of such situations could be choosing to prioritise certain tasks or people over others due to short staffing or other kinds of problems in the working environment. We'll want to see any written records the nurse, midwife, or nursing associate made at the time (or after the event if they were acting in response to an emergency) as well as any relevant policies, documents on processes, or guidance documents in place at the time. We'll look for evidence that the professional was able to think critically and draw on their experience to make evidence-informed decisions, recognise and address any personal or external factors that influenced their decision-making, and explained the rationale for their choices.
We'll also ask questions about those in management positions to find out what their role was in the situation and how they acted on any concerns that were escalated to them. There may be issues relating to bullying and harassment that we need to consider. Where those in management positions have been required to make difficult decisions, we'll also look at what action they took to escalate concerns, and if they're also on our register, how they exercised their professional judgement with reference to the Code. If they're not on our register, we'd want to know if they took the steps they should have done as we might need to share that information with others.
When dealing with cases where someone has had to exercise their professional judgement, we won't apply an artificially high standard by judging what should have happened with the benefit of hindsight. Instead, we'll look at what the individual did in the context of the pressures they were working under at the time (which we know might involve life and death situations). We'll consider if recurring situations or a sense of perpetual challenge may have impacted on their professional judgement.
If there's evidence a nurse, midwife or nursing associate (either front line staff or those in management positions) didn't take the steps they clearly should have done under the Code, and this amounts to a serious concern, then they'll need to show us they've put the concern right. We would expect to see some evidence of the nurse, midwife or nursing associate's insight and steps they've taken to strengthen their practice to reassure us that they’ve learnt from the incident and they know how to balance the relevant requirements under the Code in the future.
- Download
- Email Page
- Last Updated: 29/03/2021
Want to download and print whole sections of this FtP library? Visit the downloads page.
FtP library
-
Understanding Fitness to Practise
- Aims and principles for fitness to practise
- Allegations we consider
- How we determine seriousness
- Why we screen cases
- When we use interim orders
- Investigations
- Examining cases
- How we manage cases
- Meetings and hearings
- Resolving cases by agreement
- What sanctions are and when we might use them
-
Taking account of context
- Taking account of context - overview
- 1: We’ll approach cases on the basis that most people referred to us are normally safe
- 2: We’ll seek to build an accurate picture about the nurse, midwife or nursing associate’s practising history
- 3: We’ll always carefully consider evidence of discrimination, victimisation, bullying or harassment
- 4: Where risks are caused by system and process failures, we’ll concentrate on the action we can take to help resolve the underlying issues
- 5: In cases where a nurse, midwife or nursing associate was required to use their professional judgement we’ll respond proportionately
- 6: Evidence of steps the nurse, midwife or nursing associate has taken to address serious concerns caused by a gap in knowledge or training or personal context factors
- 7: We’ll always look into whether group norms or culture influenced an individual’s behaviour before taking action
- 8: Where an incident has occurred because of cultural problems, we’ll concentrate on taking action to minimise the risk of the same thing happening again
- What context factors we think are important to know about when considering a case
- Our culture of curiosity
- Decisions of the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) and Disclosure Scotland
- Insight and strengthened practice
- Engaging with your case
-
Screening
-
Our overall approach
- Our overall approach - overview
-
The Three Questions we ask when making Screening Decisions
- The Three Questions we ask when making Screening Decisions - overview
- Do we have a written concern about a nurse, midwife or nursing associate on our register?
- Is there evidence of a serious concern that could require us to take regulatory action to protect the public
- Is there clear evidence to show that the nurse, midwife or nursing associate is currently fit to practise?
- Clinical advice
- Referrals to other regulators
- Referrers that wish to remain anonymous
- Whistleblowing
- A decision not to take any further action at this time
- Determining the regulatory concern
- Cases that may involve incorrect or fraudulent entry
-
Our overall approach
- Interim Orders
- Investigations
- Case Examiners
-
Preparing for the FtP Committee
- Reviewing cases after they are referred to the FtPC
-
Drafting charges
- Why do we have guidance on charges?
- Jargon buster
- General approach
- How a charge becomes final
- Practical drafting issues
- Particular features of misconduct charging
- Drafting charges in health cases
- Other fitness to practise charges
- Multiple allegations
- Drafting charges in incorrect or fraudulent entry cases
- Documents panels use when deciding cases
- Gathering further evidence after the investigation
- Disclosure
- Notice of our hearings and meetings
-
Case management
- Hearing fitness to practise allegations together
- Telephone conferences
- Preliminary meetings
- Considering cases at meetings and hearings
- Removal by Agreement
- Cancelling hearings
- Constitution of panels
- Proceeding with hearings when the nurse, midwife or nursing associate is absent
- Case management during hearings
- Hearings in private and in public
- When we postpone or adjourn hearings
- Supporting people to give evidence in hearings
-
FtP Committee decision making
- Impairment
- Consensual panel determination
- Offering no evidence
- Abuse of process
- Directing further investigation during a hearing
- Evidence
- Making decisions on sexual misconduct
- Making decisions on dishonesty charges and the professional duty of candour
- Agreed removal at hearings
- Deciding on incorrect or fraudulent entry
- Sanctions
-
Reviews
- Reviewing case examiner decisions
- Interim order reviews
-
Substantive order reviews
- Substantive order reviews - overview
- Standard reviews of substantive orders before they expire
- Early review
- Exceptional cases: changing orders with immediate effect at a standard review
- Review of striking-off orders
- New allegations
- Reviewing orders when there may have been a breach
- Reviews where an interim order is in place
- Removal from the register when there is a substantive order in place
- Appeals and restoration