Midwife wins appeal against being struck off

John Aston
Thursday 18 February 2010 17:01
Comments

A midwife won a High Court appeal against being struck off today after a judge ruled she did not have a fair hearing.

The judge said there were "bad feelings" between Eunice Ogbonna and her team leader at Homerton hospital, Hackney, east London.

The team leader, Betty Pilgrim, was a crucial witness against her relating to allegations of misconduct in 2005.

Ms Pilgrim left the UK to live in the Caribbean, but the misconduct charges were found proved after the Nursing & Midwifery Council's conduct and competence committee allowed a written statement she had made to be read out at Mrs Ogbonna's disciplinary hearing.

Today, Mrs Justice Nicola Davies, sitting at the High Court in London, ruled the finding of misconduct and the consequent striking off order, made last June, could not stand.

The judge said it had become clear "that no efforts were made to secure the attendance of Ms Pilgrim at the hearing, either in person or by way of video link".

The judge added: "The court was informed that video link facilities were not available and were not used at hearings. A surprising statement in 2010."

A reading of the case papers revealed there was "a difficult working relationship" between Ms Pilgrim and Mrs Ogbonna, from Bethnal Green, east London.

The bad feeling between the two women "meant that every effort should have been made" to secure the attendance of Ms Pilgrim so that she could be cross examined.

The judge described Ms Pilgrim as the sole witness of fact with regard to the first charges against Mrs Ogbonna, who had worked as a midwife since 1986 and was facing her first misconduct hearing.

All the charges against her related to two days, April 25-26 2005, when she was working as a registered midwife in a delivery suite at Homerton hospital.

On the first day, she was alleged to have left to watch a training DVD when the delivery suite was still busy, ignoring Ms Pilgrim's direction not to leave.

Ms Pilgrim accused her of saying that she did not care if the ward was busy, she was still going to go.

The following day Ms Ogbonna was accused of failing to provide appropriate care to Patient A who was about to give birth, including failing to respect her wish for her husband to remain with her during labour, and failing to attend the patient during the delivery of her daughter.

Other allegations included failing to record a vaginal examination, inappropriately advising the patient to consider an epidural, failing to communicate with her "in a polite and professional manner" and failing to show respect for her dignity.

Referring to the Patient A charges, the judge said the disciplinary tribunal had been entitled to prefer the evidence of the patient and her husband over Mrs Ogbonna's.

But the findings of misconduct and that Mrs Ogbonna's fitness to practise was impaired were "clearly tainted" by the decision to admit Ms Pilgrim's written evidence with regard to the earlier charges.

The judge said: "No real effort was made by the panel to explore the isolated nature of these incidents and the ill health of the appellant."

It was another example "of a failure to have due regard to the fact that the appellant was unrepresented and disadvantaged by the presentation of her case".

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in