Dermot O'Donohue
Please note that the decision can take up to 5 working days to be uploaded onto the HCPTS website. Please contact one of our Hearings Team Managers via tsteam@hcpts-uk.org or +44 (0)808 164 3084 if you require any further information.
Allegation
As a registered Paramedic (PA31292) your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct.
In that:
1. On 20 September 2019, when attending an emergency call to Patient A, you did not provide adequate patient care and/or treatment in that you did not:
a. Consider and/or record your consideration of the use of atropine;
b. Ensure proper consideration of extrication of Patient A, which resulted in him walking to the ambulance.
c. Pre-alert the receiving hospital that the patient required continuous cardiac monitoring;
d. Inform the nurse in charge during handover of the need for an immediate review of the patient.
2. On 18 October 2019, when attending an emergency call to Patient B, you did not provide adequate patient care and/or treatment in that you did not:
a. Identify that the patient had suffered:
i. A fractured sternum
ii. A pneumothorax
iii. Multiple fractured ribs, with flail segments.
b. Carry out and/or record in the Patient Report Form that you had carried out a 12-lead ECG
c. Pre-alert the receiving hospital d. Maintain accurate and complete records for Patient B, in that you did not consider and/or record consideration in the Patient Report Form of:
i. transferring the patient to a major trauma centre or trauma unit;
ii. The Silver Trauma Safety Net;
iii. seeking further clinical advice; iv. medical history or high-risk factors
3. The matters set out in allegation 1 and 2 above constitute misconduct.
4. By reason of your misconduct yourfitness to practise is impaired.
Finding
Preliminary Matters
1. The Panel was satisfied that the notice of hearing dated 5 October 2022 was properly served on the Registrant as required by the Health and Care Professions Council (Conduct and Competence Committee) (Procedure) Rules 2003 as amended.
2. Mr Bridges made an application for the hearing to proceed in the absence of the Registrant. The Panel received advice from the Legal Assessor.
3. In his email to the HCPTS of 29 October 2022, the Registrant stated, -
‘I will not be attending this hearing, I will be out of the country, I do not wish it to be postponed, …’
4. Accordingly, the Registrant has deliberately chosen not to attend the hearing, he does not seek an adjournment and therefore an adjournment would not secure his attendance at a later date. In those circumstances and in view of the public interest in the expeditious disposal of this application, the Panel decided that it would be fair to proceed in the absence of the Registrant and it decided to do so.
Background
5. The Registrant is registered as a Paramedic and was employed by Elite EMS and the East Midlands Ambulance Service (‘the Trust’) between 2017 and 2019.
6. On 20 September 2019, concerns were raised by Northampton General Hospital regarding the care management provided to Patient A. Specifically, these concerns related to not pre-alerting the hospital to the arrival of Patient A despite the patient having a flail chest, pneumothorax and a fractured clavicle and sternum.
7. Following these concerns, the Trust undertook an investigation into the Registrant’s performance. This highlighted a number of additional issues. The matter was subsequently self-referred to the HCPC by the Registrant on 2 February 2020 following an internal Trust investigation.
8. On 5 March 2020, the Registrant informed the HCPC that he wished to stop practising as a Paramedic and to resign from the HCPC Register.
9. A Panel of the Investigating Committee met on 10 June 2021 and determined that there was a case to answer in relation to an allegation that the Registrant’s fitness to practise is impaired. That allegation is set out above.
10. Following that determination, Kingsley Napley LLP (‘Kingsley Napley’) solicitors were instructed by the HCPC to undertake an investigation in relation to that allegation. As part of the investigation, documents were obtained that have been placed before the Panel at this hearing.
Application by the HCPC for Consent to Withdraw the Proceedings
11. On 25 August 2021, the Registrant confirmed to Kingsley Napley that he was not working as a Paramedic and that he admitted the allegations against him. On 7 September 2021, he confirmed to Kingsley Napley that he wished to be voluntarily removed from the Register and did not contest the allegation. The Registrant completed a Consensual Disposal Request Pro-Forma form dated 2 September 2022 (‘the Completed Pro Forma’).
12. The HCPC reviewed the case and considered the circumstances suitable for disposal by way of a Voluntary Removal Agreement, as the Registrant admits the substance of the allegation made against him and current impairment of his fitness to practise.
13. A Voluntary Removal Agreement is an agreement to the effect that the HCPC will not take any further action against the Registrant in relation to this matter on the understanding that he will be removed from the Register, cease practising as a Paramedic and not attempt to re-join the Register for a period of at least 5 years. In order to give effect to such an agreement, the HCPC is required to seek the consent of the appropriate panel, in this case a panel of the Conduct and Competence Committee. Accordingly, it has made the present application for that consent.
14. A copy of the Voluntary Removal Agreement signed on behalf of the HCPC and by the Registrant and made on 9 November 2022 was placed before the Panel.
15. Mr Bridges made submissions that were based on the contents of a written Skeleton Argument dated 13 September 2022. In summary, he submitted that the appropriate level of public protection is secured by means of the Voluntary Removal Agreement and disposing of this matter by way of consent would not be detrimental to the wider public interest. He also submitted that the requirements specified in the HCPTS’s Practice Note, Disposal of Cases by Consent, March 2018 had been satisfied and that in the circumstances effect should be given to the Voluntary Removal Agreement.
16. The Panel received advice from the Legal Assessor.
Decision on Application
17. The Practice Note indicates that the overarching statutory objective is the protection of the public and that a Panel should not agree to resolve a case by consent unless it is satisfied that the appropriate level of public protection is being secured; and doing so would not be detrimental to the wider public interest.
18. The Panel has considered the contents of the Voluntary Removal Agreement and is satisfied that its effect will be to have his name struck from the register so as to be prohibited from practising as a Paramedic. This will protect service users and other members of the public from any repetition of the misconduct which the Registrant has admitted.
19. The Panel is also satisfied that disposal of the proceedings in this way will not be detrimental to the wider public interest. There is nothing so egregious in the nature and circumstances of the case so as to require a public hearing in order to uphold public confidence in the profession and to declare and uphold proper professional standards.
20. The Practice Note also requires the HCPC to provide a Skeleton Argument giving a clear, appropriately detailed and objectively justified explanation of why the matter is suitable for disposal by consent on the terms set out in the draft order in the Practice Note; and has made clear to the registrant concerned that co-operation and participation in the consent process will not automatically lead to a consent order being approved.
21. The Panel was satisfied that the Skeleton Argument has provided the necessary explanation. The Panel was also satisfied that in view of the content of the Completed Pro Forma, the HCPC has made clear to the Registrant that co-operation and participation in the consent process will not automatically lead to a consent order being approved.
22. In those circumstances, the Panel was satisfied that it is appropriate to grant the application and to give its consent that the fitness to practise proceedings against the Registrant with respect to the allegation set out above be withdrawn, to give effect to the Voluntary Removal Agreement.
Order
No information currently available
Notes
No notes available
Hearing History
History of Hearings for Dermot O'Donohue
| Date | Panel | Hearing type | Outcomes / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14/11/2022 | Conduct and Competence Committee | Voluntary Removal Agreement | Voluntary Removal agreed |