Censure for exploiting professional relationship.

EXPLOITING THE professional relationship with a mental health client of the service the nurse worked for has resulted in censure for the nurse. In an October 2002 decision, the Nursing Council found a comprehensive nurse guilty of professional misconduct on the grounds the conduct would bring or was likely to bring discredit on the profession.

The Council held the nurse had exploited the professional relationship by selling the client a car, when the nurse knew or ought to have known the car had no warrant or registration; was not able to get a warrant of fitness or registration because of the damage it had sustained while the nurse owned it; and the client was repaying debts and/or needed to borrow money to purchase the car.

In making its finding, the Council stated the public must be able to have confidence nurses will not abuse the trust required for appropriate nurse-client relationships. The behaviour fell below the standard expected of a registered nurse working in the mental health service. The nurse's action was unacceptable because the nurse took advantage of information available, as part of the fiduciary duty that existed between the nurse and the client, to secure the sale of the vehicle, without considering the consequences for a vulnerable client. This sort of transaction between a nurse and patient/client was always unacceptable. There was a power imbalance in relationships of this nature in favour of the nurse and the nature of the client's illness increased that vulnerability.

Council ordered the nurse be censured. In making this order, it was of the opinion the nurse was relatively inexperienced, who, until this incident, was highly regarded by the manager and colleagues. It accepted the nurse had resigned at the time and had not considered the consequences for either themself or the client. The Council noted the nurse was practising, had organised ongoing professional supervision and had expressed remorse. Council accepted the nurse had learned from the experience, that there was no threat to public safety or harm to the reputation of the profession if the nurse continued in practice.

Council ordered the nurse pay $11,500, being 30 precent of the actual costs and expenses of Preliminary Proceedings Committee investigation and Council inquiry; and a notice stating the effect of the orders be published in the New Zealand Gazette, Kai Tiaki Nursing New Zealand, Nursing Review, Nursing Council Newsletter and the information be released to any accredited members of the press, with suppression of the names of all the parties and identifying details.