Tribunal Judgement for Professional Misconduct- MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theTribunal Judgementfor Professional Misconduct. Answer: Introduction Simonsen v Health Care Complaints Commission is a case that was brought before the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of South Wales. The case involved Andrew Simonsen (as the applicant) and the Health Care Complaints Commission (as the respondent). It was heard on June 8, 2016 and decided upon on July 6, 2016. The case was brought before Prof. Anderson, D., Gibson, V., Walsh, A., and ADCJ Marks. In this case, the applicant was accused of professional misconduct. As a nurse, the applicant was expected to comply with the professional codes and standards of practice for advanced practice nurses and nurse practitioners. However, on July 3, 2011, the applicant, while on an evening shift, flouted the codes of conduct governing the operation of nurses. Individual, Collegial, and Organizational Accountability in the Case Individual Accountability The actions of the applicant constituted lack of accountability. There was individual unaccountability by the applicant. There were in a violation of the codes of ethics governing the conduct of nurses in the country. First and foremost, the applicant acted irresponsibly by allowing his friend to enter into the healthcare facility in which there were patients. The applicant erred by allowing a stranger who is a heroin addict to get entrance into the facility. The second act of unaccountability was noticed when the applicant deliberately failed to verify and administer the suitable medication to the patient. Thirdly, there was lack of accountability because the applicant self-administered a morphine drug then discarded the drug so as to conceal evidence for the mistake made. This was a very risky practice because it would affect the patients at the facility (Farazmand, 2014). Moreover, the applicant showed lack of accountability when he demonstrated an improper behavior towards his co lleague. Lastly, there was lack of accountability when the applicant cheated the management of Sir Moses Montefiore Jewish Home, Hunters Hill in order to get employment despite his registration status. These show that the practitioner violated the standards of practice provided by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia. The actions of the applicant were in a violation of the professional codes and standards of practice for advanced practice nurses and nurse practitioners. As a practitioner, the applicant has a responsibility to comply with all the standards which require him to engage in safe practice at all times (Birks, Davis, Smithson Cant, 2016). The applicant should always be ready to deliver high quality services which cannot cause any harm to the patient. Nursing practice should be based on the principles of honesty, integrity, and accountability. Therefore, even if it means keeping his job, the respondent was not supposed to cheat the employer. All the healthcare practitioners should be responsible in their acts (Harding 2013). There should be no such violations because it can be disastrous. All the patients need to be treated with respect, provided with safe care that can help in facilitating their recovery process. It should therefore be upon the applicant to consider changing his conduct s and conform to all the professional standards without any form of violation. Collegial Accountability There was a collegial accountability because the incidence which occurred at the hospital did not only involve the applicant, but other professionals as well. The practitioners violated the codes of conduct as stipulated by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (Birks, Davis, Smithson Cant, 2016). During handover, the practitioner did not provide the applicant with an updated document. Meaning, there was no formal handover because the information was passed orally to the patient. This is a great mistake because it the bedside handover was supposed to be formalized done in compliance with the professional standard and codes of practice. The other instance of collegial accountability came up when the Assistant on Nursing-Ms. Joanne Worrell and Mr. Mustafa noticed the applicants weird behaviors, but did nothing about it. This was an act of unaccountability because the professionals were supposed to act in response to the unusual behavior because it would expose the patients to r isks (Burston Tuckett, 2013). It shows that the nurses were not acting within the scope of practice for the RNs in Australia. It is therefore clear that the practitioners did not comply with the professional codes and standards of practice for advanced practice nurses and nurse practitioners. As professionals, the practitioners were supposed to adopt a collaborative approach in whatever they do. Team work is important because it can help in creating a safe environment for all the patients (O'Brien, et al., 2014). According to the spirit of team work, all the team members should always be ready to support one another. If this is done, all the activities such as clinical bedside handover can be carried out so smoothly without any unnecessary challenges. On the other hand, if the professionals were accountable in their actions, they would not have ignored the applicants unusual conducts (Kangasniemi, Pakkanen Korhonen 2015). Instead, they would have reported the matter to the management for an immediate redress. This is the kind of accountability that is expected of such professionals. Organizational Accountability The case involved organizational accountability as well. The law requires that organizations engagement in the employment of healthcare practitioners should be actively involved in the monitoring of the employees to determine if they are fit to serve the public (Scanlon, Cashin, Bryce, Kelly Buckely, 2016). For example, before hiring a practitioner, the employer should confirm the registration status to ensure that it meets threshold. It is necessary to do so because it can enable the employer to check if there are any conditions imposed on the status of the practitioners. At the same time, the employer should check if the practitioner has been engaged in the breach of professional codes of conduct or engaged in any activity or behavior which can lead to unsafe practice (Johnson, 2015). All these were not done by the two organizations which had employed the applicant. Meaning, the organizations were not acting in accordance with the required standards. The situation can be rectified by adopting the culture of accountability. All the healthcare organizations should be ready to comply with all the regulations governing the healthcare sector. The safety of the patients should be treated as a priority area that should never be ignored. Therefore, what the management of Chesalon Aged Care would have done is to closely monitor and assess the competencies of the applicant. If any unusual conducts are noticed, immediate action should be taken because any such repeated actions can create an unsafe environment which can endanger the lives of the patients. However, on its part, Sir Moses Montefiore Jewish Home was supposed to be actively involved in the carrying out a background check on all the health practitioners employed to serve its clients. If this was properly done, the organization would have noticed the discrepancies in the registration status of the applicant. In fact, background check does not only entail the registration status, b ut the seeking of clarification from the previous employer (Farazmand, 2014). If all these measures are taken, no organization will be in any such crisis any more. The organizations should be accountable because the safety of all the patients is in their hands. Any slight mistake might be disastrous. Conclusion Healthcare is a sensitive sector which needs to be served by highly-trained and competent professionals. All the practitioners should be ready to be accountable in their duties and comply with all regulations governing the profession. When given an opportunity to serve the patients, the applicant did not discharge his duties with utmost professionalism. It is for this reason that the actions of the applicant are deemed to be in a violation of the professional codes and standards of practice for advanced practice nurses and nurse practitioners. It led to an individual, collegial, and organization cases of accountability which can be ultimately resolved if appropriate measures are taken. References Birks, M., Davis, J., Smithson, J., Cant, R. (2016). Registered nurse scope of practice in Australia: an integrative review of the literature. Contemporary Nurse, 52(5), 522-543. Farazmand, A. (2014). Public Administration in a Globalized World. London and New York:Routledge. Burston, A. S., Tuckett, A. G., (2013). Moral distress in nursing Contributing factors, outcomes and interventions. Nursing Ethics, 20(3), 312-324. Edwards, M., (2016). Physician-Assisted Death and Conscientious Objection: Implications for Critical Care Nurses. Canadian Journal of Critical Care Nursing, 27(2). Harding, T., (2013). Cultural safety: A vital element for nursing ethics. Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 29(1), 4-12. Johnson, M., (2015). Morality for humans: Ethical understanding from the perspective of cognitive science. University of Chicago Press: Chicago. Kangasniemi, M., Pakkanen, P. Korhonen, A., (2015). Professional ethics in nursing: an integrative review. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(8), pp.1744-1757. Larner, E. Carter, R., (2016). The issue of consent in medical practice. British journal of haematology, 172(2), pp.300-304. O'Brien, A., et al., (2014). Evaluating the preceptor role for pre-registration nursing and midwifery student clinical education. Nurse education today, 34(1), 19-24. Scanlon A, Cashin A, Bryce J, Kelly J, Buckely T. (2016) The complexities of defining nurse practitioner scope of practice in the Australian context. Collegian. 23, 129-142. https://www.collegianjournal.com/article/S1322-7696%2814%2900091-2/pdf https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWNMT/2013/26.html https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWNMT/2013/21.html https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWNMT/2013/26.html https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWNMT/2013/21.html ref Fact Sheet: Scope of practice of nurse practitioners. (2015) https://www.nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au/News/2011-11-29-Position-Statement.aspx Fact Sheet: Advanced nursing practice and speciality areas within nursing. (2016) https://www.nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Statements/FAQ/fact-sheet-advanced-nursing-practice-and-specialty-areas.aspx Scanlon A, Cashin A, Bryce J, Kelly J, Buckely T. (2016) The complexities of defining nurse practitioner scope of practice in the Australian context. Collegian. 23, 129-142. https://www.collegianjournal.com/article/S1322-7696%2814%2900091-2/pdf Lowe G, Plummer V, OBrien AP, Boyd, L. (2012). Time to clarify the value of advanced practice nursing roles in health care. Journal of Advanced Nursing 68 (3), 677-685. doi: doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05790.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05790.x/abstract MacLellan L, Higgins I, Levett-Jones T. (2015) Medical acceptance of the nurse practitioner role in Australia: A decade on. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. 27, 152-159. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2327-6924.12141/epdf Middleton S, Gardner A, Della P, Lam L, Allnutt N, Gardner G. (2016) How has the profile of Australian nurse practitioners changed over time? Collegian. 23, 69-77. https://www.collegianjournal.com/article/S1322-7696%2814%2900110-3/pdf