UK woman lost nursing license and facing criminal trial for anti-vaccine event

Discussion in 'Coronavirus (COVID-19) News' started by kazenatsu, Nov 27, 2021.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

  1. GrayMan

    GrayMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    8,357
    Likes Received:
    3,512
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no such thing as an unintentional lie. By definition a lie requires 'intent to decieve'. A 'Falsity' is likely the correct term for what you refer to.

    It can be easier for doctors to lie because people either lack the knowledge or have the intellect to identify deception or mistakes in their logic. You should watch the show "Dr Death".
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  2. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Absolutely. But like I said, licensing boards even look at conduct that is 100% unrelated to the exercise of the profession, let alone when the person uses his/her credentials to lend credibility to what they say to the public, even if it is outside of working hours and not for pay. Even worse, is if what they are saying runs contrary to established standards of care. So, yes, I'm not surprised at all that the UK nursing licensing authority cancelled her license. It happens all the time for similar cases, and it has always happened, much before this pandemic.

    When you identify yourself as a member of a profession, and then you proceed to dispensing misinformation, you are denigrating the whole body of the profession, and yes, the licensing board will react to that.

    But boards also look at unrelated conduct. For example, I know of a medical doctor who lost his license because he was convicted of domestic violence. He used to beat his wife. The board considered it conduct unbecoming of a doctor and cancelled his license. Obviously he wasn't beating his wife during his working hours. This is why, like I said, state medical boards and bar associations want to see a criminal background check, want disclosures of convictions, lawsuits, etc., even when they are unrelated to the exercise of the profession, when they grant or renew a license. Which is also why licenses are granted for a period then have to be renewed, and the renewal process includes disclosure of any legal trouble the professional may have faced in between the last and the current renewal, including, like I said, the ones unrelated to the profession. Every year when I renew my license, I'm asked "have you been convicted of any felony or misdemeanor other that minor traffic violations, between your last renewal date and today?"

    So, @kazenatsu knows nothing about this process, but "doubts it." He thinks that a licensing board only looks at what the person is doing/saying while working. Not so. Not even employers do that (routinely, employees are disciplined for stuff they did outside of employment hours, if what they did impacts on the business' image and reputation - and again, the courts usually side with the employer in these cases, when the employee then sues for wrongful termination; the courts recognize the employer's right to a clean reputation, so that employees are required to exercise decorum as a condition of employment, especially if they have identified themselves as an employee of the employer - for example in social media - before they issued controversial opinions or engaged in disreputable conduct), let alone regulatory boards.

    People misinterpret a lot the "right to free speech." It is narrow. It comes with a series of conditions, as in the usual example of yelling Fire in a crowded theater. And this right doesn't mean that there won't be consequences to what a person is freely saying.

    Sure, an employee has the right to say certain things in social media... but then, an employer also has the right to fire that employee, if the values expressed by the employee conflict with corporate values, and if the employee identified him/herself as a member of that corporation.

    "Hear, hear, my Facebook followers. While I'm not at work right now, I'm a licensed, registered nurse and I work for Memorial Hospital. Due to my credentials and my experience at work, I know that the Covid-19 pandemic is a hoax, doesn't exist, the vaccines are meant to kill you, and you shouldn't wear masks and social distance."

    You can rest assured that Memorial Hospital will fire that person, and the nursing licensing board will cancel that person's license, and if either action is challenged in court, the court will find for the hospital and for the licensing board. Guaranteed, with numerous precedent cases. I mean, after due process. Maybe I shouldn't say guaranteed because courts can be weird sometimes. if she has a very good lawyer, maybe she will prevail. But chances are that she won't. The hospital is taking care of its reputation, and the board is taking care of the safety of the public, and the courts will find both goals, solid and justified, so she will lose.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  3. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Now, @GrayMan I'm much less certain about this part of the OP's story, of her being criminally prosecuted. I guess, there are specific laws in the UK for that. I know nothing about UK laws. I do know that in Italy, a law was passed by Parliament, creating the felony "aiding an epidemic" for those who work contrary to the Italian Government's efforts to curb an infection that is spreading throughout the country. So I suppose that if a country has specific laws like these, a person can be criminally prosecuted for what she did.

    I doubt that she would be criminally prosecuted in the United States. Or even if she got prosecuted, her odds of prevailing, quoting the right of assembly, free speech, etc., would be much higher than the odds of her prevailing against a hospital that fired her or a nursing licensing board that cancelled her license, because these are not criminal matters.
     
  4. Monash

    Monash Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2019
    Messages:
    4,517
    Likes Received:
    3,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Technically perhaps but I would include the repetition of an untruth under the heading of 'lie' in the context of discussions (ike this one) about how people, especially politicians manipulate lies to their advantage.

    QUOTE="GrayMan, post: 1073098389, member: 35617"]It can be easier for doctors to lie because people either lack the knowledge or have the intellect to identify deception or mistakes in their logic. You should watch the show "Dr Death".[/QUOTE]

    True, but they can't lie as easily to other Doctors. Oh, they could get away with doing it for example when talking to a patient in private (to use your example). If the discussion relates to known medical facts however doing the same thing in public and not being called on it is a far harder proposition.
     
  5. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In my opinion, your argument hinges on exactly what definition of "identify" we are using.
     
  6. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And that can easily get into murky territory where rights are violated.

    That should not interfere with the right to express opinion.

    Especially when the opinion is being expressed outside of the job and outside of an area where licensing is relevant.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  7. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Simply saying she is a nurse.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  8. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It can. But that's why there is due process and right of defense. When a medical board starts an investigation against a practitioner, the practitioner is allowed to retain a lawyer and mount a defense.
     
  9. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Her license has already been suspended.

    Seems she was not given an opportunity to argue a defense before that happened.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  10. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    How exactly do you think that a registered nurse saying that a pandemic is false and a hoax and the vaccines are MEANT TO KILL PEOPLE and people should not wear masks and social distance, is "an area where licensing is irrelevant"? She is dispensing professional advice. It doesn't need to be paid advice during working hours to constitute professional advice.

    Like I said, she has the right to express her opinion (at least in the US, she does; she likely wouldn't be criminally prosecuted). But then, the nursing licensing board also has the right to cancel her license, and her hospital has the right to fire her. It's that simple. Free speech doesn't mean that the speech being freely issued is void of any and all consequences.
     
  11. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you serious?

    She is not allowed to express her opinion, and incidentally also say that she happens to be working as a nurse?

    Then you have taken away freedom of speech.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  12. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't know what the UK laws are. Over here, there is right of defense.
     
  13. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    After suspension has already begun.

    These things can drag out a long time.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  14. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    100% serious. If she identifies herself as a nurse, the nursing licensing board will look at what she is saying, using her credentials as a way to lend credibility to what she is saying.
    Again, I'm talking from insider knowledge. I've consulted for my medical board (and the nursing board is similar) for years, in dozens of cases.
     
  15. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't say "identify".

    I said she happens to say that she is working as a nurse. Shouldn't she have the right to state that fact?

    What happens if she expressed her opinion, and in a previous old post she forgot about from 2 years ago she had said she was a nurse?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  16. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it depends on the case. Some cases, the board may just issue a letter notifying the practitioner of the issue, inviting the practitioner to explain him/herself, and notifying the practitioner that he/she may seek counsel to write up the explanation, etc. In some cases, the restriction on the license may only be issued if the practitioner is convicted of substandard practice or other offenses. In some other cases where there is ongoing risk for the public, a practitioner may face a suspension, pending investigation and final judgment and decision.
     
  17. GrayMan

    GrayMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    8,357
    Likes Received:
    3,512
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think if you don't identify that you are a nurse and express your opinions, using only the facts, not your position as an authority in the matter, it shouldn't be an issue.
    In this case, she dressed up as a nurse and actively spoke to a croud to directly use her position to make her arguments more influential.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  18. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The question then is exactly what that means.


    For example, maybe a doctor is expressing his opinion on something, and is even sharing a study he did, which supports his view. But it should be obvious to people from the existence of the study that he is a doctor.

    So what you are saying would violate his free speech rights to express his opinion and share evidence.

    Likewise shouldn't a nurse be able to explain what she has seen at her job? How can she do that if she does not have the right to reveal she is a nurse??
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  19. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    She has all the right to state that fact, but if she does, then what she says is subject to review by the nursing board.
    What happens in your second scenario? It would probably be a mitigating circumstance.
    But if she said, "look, I'm a nurse, and I know for a fact that the pandemic is false" then of course the board will look into it.
     
  20. Sallyally

    Sallyally Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2017
    Messages:
    15,834
    Likes Received:
    28,238
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    This nurse should remember about how we were all warned during our nurse training “Would you like to hear that read in court by a coroner?”.
     
    CenterField likes this.
  21. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is correct.
    This is one of the reasons why my hospital advises all practitioners to refrain from posting on a Facebook profile, "I'm a doctor, I work for Memorial Hospital" or "I'm a nurse, I work for Memorial Hospital" etc.
    The Risk Department says that if you do that, what you post may be interpreted as expressing the opinion of the hospital, or may reflect on the hospital's reputation, and therefore may be held against you.
    Over here, I did disclose that I'm a doctor. But I never gave ANY indication of where I work. So I'm not jeopardizing my employer's reputation when I issue opinions on stuff, here. And I'm not identifying myself by name either, while Facebook profiles typically have the person's real name. Still, sometimes I worry. Fortunately I do NOT post information here that goes contrary to evidence-based medicine so I don't think I'd have anything held against me by my medical board or my employer.
     
    GrayMan likes this.
  22. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The person could clarify what they are saying is not the opinion of the hospital.


    What if hospitals started saying they would not continue to employ people who were Trump supporters, or would not continue to employ people who engaged in interracial relationships, because they feared it might reflect badly on the hospital?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2021
  23. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, you did. Post #80.
     
  24. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,636
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    taken out of context
     
  25. CenterField

    CenterField Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2020
    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    8,378
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    True, and that's part of the advice that is given. But the Risk Department says, best is to not issue any opinion whatsoever, but if you do issue one, do make a point that it is personal and does not reflect the opinion of the hospital. This would make it less likely that the employee would upset the hospital but might still be an issue with the board, because she'd still be issuing an opinion as a nurse. Or, in extreme cases, the hospital might argue that even though the person expressed that it was a personal opinion, it would still impact on the hospital's reputation, for employing such a nutcase.
     

Share This Page