To think the NMC holding a hearing to decide whether Lucy Letby should be struck off the nursing register is ridiculous

[Mylovelycupoftea]

link

I mean, how is this a good use of public money?

no different when eg right to a fair trial in a court of law etc

Radiographers aren't part of the NMC though. Again, different processes. Although I find it hard to believe that an NHS Professional would get struck off without a hearing. Fired maybe but not struck off.

It’s not your money so what’s your beef?

It's an important process. It's unlikely she will ever be able to appeal her conviction, but that's not a reason for the NMC to ignore its procedures.

She needs to be formally struck off.

Well on previous form they’ll obtain posts in other NHS trusts with a promotion and even higher salary.

The results of her 'hearing' are already on the NMC website

if she was ever released is there any chance she could work abroad ?

All disciplinarys are subject to the law and policies her case is no different

What did it say?

It has to be done. It has to be seen to be done. And it isn't public money.

The hearing, I imagine, will take about 10 minutes because it's fucking obvious. As others have said, they can then sign off and everything will have been done properly.

Wow - double down on your argument and become offensive just because you are being completely (a) wrong and (b) unreasonable. What is "fucking stupid" is starting and then perpetuating a thread where you post wildly incorrect information to support your own personal opinions, and speak abusively to people who point out your errors. If it is a "fucking stupid" to sit around discussing this then what does it make you for starting the thread?

It's obviously a wooden interpretation of the rules, and ridiculous.

This ^

I pay my fees to the NMC and I fully support them following due process to strike her off.

I used to be a registered nurse and I voluntarily removed myself from the register (COVID pandemic broke me and I knew I couldn't do the job to the level it deserved any more). I did nothing wrong, there was no NMC referral or disciplinary.

There has to be due process to distinguish between people like me, who have done nothing wrong, with an unblemished record, and people who have done something wrong and need to be removed from the register in the public interest. I have no shame in removing myself-it was the right thing to do-and shouldn't be lumped in the same bucket as someone guilry of malpractice or worse.

It is incredibly unlikely, even if allowed to remain or register/let the registration lapse, that Letby would ever be in a position to practise again. But the NMC also upholds the reputation of the profession-and the removal of Letby represents more than just preventing her return to practice. Its about public confidence, transparency and upholding standards too.

^ This. And their wives/husbands. Shameless. One spouse of a former CEO is still a non-exec director of a NHS Trust. Look her up. You couldn't make it up.

Public money?

Why shouldn’t she be? Since when did we hold women responsible for their husband’s actions? It’s also a bit pointless to tell us to “look it up” without even giving us a name.

It is relevant when they've both moved in the same circles for years, have both profited from the same networks, and one of them is still doing so. These are very, very well-paid people. It might not be illegal, but it's shameless and arrogant. My example just happened to be male/female spouses. It wasn't my intention to make this a discussion about gender, and I'm sorry that it's been read in this way. I should have worded it differently. It applies more generally. Nepotism stinks.

In social work a serious conviction can be enough for automatic striking off the register, not sure why different for nursing. The listed offences are basically murder, human trafficking, and sexual offences.

Im glad they didn't let it lapse
It's important for it to be distinguished between someone voluntarily leaving they register, or lapsing and someone who has been struck off

The nmc have no idea how likely it is the current appeals against conviction will work (despite people saying there's no chance, without being a legal expert there's no way of being 100% certain)

I imagine it wasn't a full hearing. Simply them saying her name the context and then writing the decision.

Regardless of the brevity its important its minuited and documented somewhere as all people struck off should be. Rather than a strike her off with o record?

Outside of the case:

I've pushed before for people who are intending to let their thing lapse to be struck off. For me it'd important as public record to say they aren't suitable for the job.

Otherwise they might have re registered or even if not got a job that is related. I know people who for example told people they gave up because of not wanting shift work etc and attempted to get a similar job but not a specific nursing job in voluntary services, register with a professional body abroad who was less stringent, worked in care etc.

It's really important for people to actually get struck off so the reason is public

^ This, what @Whenwordsfail says.

Non executive directors aren’t “very, very well paid people”. They get £15k a year. It has nothing to do with gender, I’d have said the same if the sexes had been the other way round. We, quite rightly, don’t punish people for their spouse’s crimes or negligence. You have absolutely no evidence of nepotism - or perhaps you don’t really know what it means.

How do you feel about lynch mobs?
Protocols like this don’t exist to protect the Lucy Letby’s of the world. But you have to apply the process to everyone so that the shades of grey cases don’t get unfairly treated or so that the boundaries of acceptable or unacceptable don’t waver depending on who is making the decision that day.