Care home manager struck off over 'horrific' restraining of disabled person

Sanctuary Care

A care home manager in Ayrshire has been struck off after inappropriately and unnecessarily restraining a disabled person for a vaccine injection.

A tribunal hearing heard that Janette Donnelly's use of force was "horrific" and resulted in scenes of chaos at Millport Care Centre on 19 February 2021.

The jab ended up being administered through the resident's clothes, following which Donnelly told a colleague that she would not report that it had been injected that way.

The Nursing and Midwifery Council ruled her actions were a significant departure from the standards expected of nurses and she had repeatedly given a "dishonest and self serving" account of the day to justify her actions.

Seven charges against Donnelly - who was described as previously having an unblemished record with her job - were proven. Two other charges were not proven.

A registered NHS nurse had visited the care home on the day to administer the covid-19 vaccine to people staying there.

The resident, described in the hearing as Service User A, had a learning disability and at times restraints were used to allow her to be fed, but these were only meant to be for brief periods of time.

She was due to receive her second vaccination but two attempts to do so in the building's dining room earlier that day had not gone ahead.

Instead, the vaccine was given in the resident's bedroom while she was being held on the floor Donnelly and two other staff members. Evidence to the panel said the woman was shouting, screaming and struggling.

One witness stated that she would never forget the sight she was confronted with, that it was a "horrific" scene, and that Donnelly had restrained the person's head with her hands.

The witness also stated that she told Donnelly "this level of restraint was deeply inappropriate and that she could not do this", to which the manager swore at her.

Another witness noted he felt uncomfortable carrying out the restraint and that it was not right to do so, but felt he could not raise a concern with the other nurses.

'Sustained deceit'

Donnelly told the NHS nurse to carry out the injection through the resident's clothing.

After this happened the colleague said to Donnelly, "please don't tell anyone I've administered the vaccine in this way", to which Donnelly said "of course I won't".

The tribunal heard that Donnelly released the patient, who got up and ran down the corridor waving her hands and screaming.

Oral evidence heard by the tribunal referred to the incident as being "a scene of chaos".

Donnelly claimed she was unaware the vaccine had been given through the clothing, which the panel did not agree with. It ruled her actions in not reporting this were dishonest.

The panel also ruled that the vaccine did not have to be given on that day, and the nurse could have visited at another time.

It concluded that Donnelly's actions "placed Service User A at a risk of physical harm, and both Service User A and your colleagues at a risk of emotional harm".

Donnelly defended her actions by saying she was under "organisational pressure" and the desire to get everyone vaccinated had clouded her judgement.

She said she accepted that her actions had compromised Service User A's "dignity and human right to refusal", and she apologised to her and her family.

She added she had made a "gross error in judgement" and would never let it happen again, while saying nothing like the incident had happened in four years since then.

However, the panel rejected the claim Donnelly had been "overwhelmed" and said her actions were "driven by a desire for convenience".

It added that her actions "were a serious departure from the standards expected from a registered nurse" while she "breached fundamental tenets of the profession".

The regulator further ruled Donnelly carried out "sustained deceit" with her accounts of the incident, saying this amounted to "genuine acts of manufactured dishonesty", with the true nature of the case only emerging due to a whistle-blower.

It added that only a striking-off order would suffice, subject to an appeal.