Nurses- do not just take it.

We begin (2016)  by recognising a successful appeal against the NMC’s decision of impaired of fitness to practice of a qualified nurse . Vasanta  Suddock somehow had the strength to represent herself . This case is  of immense importance for nurses everywhere who are wrongly accused. The case notes may be used by solicitors and nurses in the future, to strengthen their own appeal.

Here are some key statements made by the judge (Mrs Andrews)  ;

The committee “failed to appreciate that there is evidence that strongly supports Ms Suddock’s assertion that someone, acting in bad faith has set out to ruin her hitherto unquestioned professional reputation and her career”.

“–a  failure to examine the evidence in the way that a court or other legal tribunal would—” ” It placed far too much reliance on the demeanour of the witnesses”.

“I am satisfied that the decision of the panel to find the charges proved against Ms Suddock was clearly wrong”.

“Additionally— there  is the clearest possible evidence, which the panel brushed aside, “that someone was making  a crude attempt to frame her”.

Lord Woolf’s dictum the “more serious the allegation, the less likely it is that the event occured”.

C:\Users\User\Documents\NMC case suddock.htm


There will be more to come regarding this. Watch this space.


8 thoughts on “Nurses- do not just take it.

  1. As the NMC has named me and Care UK in my case When the case is finished I will give a full history of my time with that company

  2. In very simple terms;
    surely an NNC case should be considered on facts alone ? Yet we have a case of a nurse who remains on the register for hitting a patient, versus a nurse who was removed for eating a patient’s fish and chips. Apart from considering that certain cases ought not to reach a hearing at all (ie should be screened out); there is evidence (Lenin Nightingale and beyond ), that a major factor determining the outcome at a hearing- is the demeanour of the nurse. One can uderstand why some nurses may retaliate at a hearing with sarcasm, or annoyance. We wonder if there has been a case where the nurse who attended, has actually walked out of the hearing? Over in the USA there certainly is one case that we know of, where the nurse videod and recorded the hearing- before displaying it on Youtube. We cannot seem to find this now.
    Consider NOT only cases that reach the NMC, but cases that do NOT reach them ie are NOT reported. This may well indicate how well a nurse is “liked ” by their employer or colleagues. Consider also cases which have been based on total lies. I know of one hearing that was disbanded before it ever occured- after a witness was encouraged to inform the NMC she had been ordered to lie by her employer. Hearings ought not to be based on one word against another- but they very often are.
    Who are actual committee members is a huge factor. Now there are times when 2 lay people and one nurse make the important decision. Yes there are proposals to actually review the hearing outcomes- this will be an imporant step but there are improvements that can be made to avoid injustice. Lay people for example, may well be swayed by the nuirse. Yet the nurse may have no specialist knowledge of the field concerned within the hearing. Care homes are indeed, exeremely different to hospitals- others may consider fields such as nursig within theatres. An analysis of cases would inform one of the relevance of this point.
    Not to mention the “private ” means of decision making- why shouldn’t the accused nurse be aware of exactly WHAT basis that decision is made on ie what contributed towards that decision in addition to the facts of the case? Relevant factors include agreement or non- agreement of committee members, factors which may sway the hearing- some of which are mentioned above.
    Must not forget “mitigation” (factors taken into consideration when the NMC decision is made)- many of these nurse have unblemished careers. One can understand when the hearing occurs, why he or she may no longer be working as a nurse. Whether they are or not, ought not to be an influencing factor at the hearing.

  3. The NMC ‘guilt’ verdict appears to be based on accusation by an employer who would never make a malicious accusation, Would they?
    Accusations/witness statements by a gaggle of care assistants who are currying favour with the boss
    Allegations often false made by employers/managers who want rid of a trouble maker. and boy can they get staff to write a statement to that ends for them.
    One very big company in private healthcare made an off care assistants/kitchen assistants couldn’t refuse. Their personal records would be and were cleansed. Poor yearly appraisals were replaced by good ones written by the regional manager, and all disciplinary reports removed.
    The managers/witnesses are often NVQ/care assistant managers who dont have any medical knowledge what so ever. They go before the NMC talking about CDs but the medication they are talking of is a POM
    The NMC should accept the fact they are NOT a law court and move away from the pseudo-legal façade and either become a disciplinary organisation where these dubious statements are ‘considered’ or become fully legal where proof must be beyond reasonable doubt.
    They should remove ‘rags’ such as Court News UK from its list which gives the NMC an air of being part of the law process. Court News give a brief outline of LAW court cases and also much of the slime provided by the NMC
    High Court Judge says; “NMC shows Regulator as unfair unreliable and unsafe”
    How right she is

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s