As a group we have often discussed that NMC Fitness to Practice hearing outcomes vary widely depending on the panel you may come across.

Sanction guidance to the panel members is open to interpretation and there is not transparent assessment tools used to ensure all panels assessing Fitness to Practice of nurses, midwives and nursing associates is measured to the same standard. This is because panels are independant and able to make their own conclusions based on the evidence brought before them, we are told. However two different panels could in theory receive the same case and come back with two widely varying outcomes. One may well instils a Conditions of Practice whilst the other may instils a Suspension or Strike Off.

A recent case has sparked outrage amongst professionals and supporters as it shows an example of this very issue. The case heard extreme disregard for professional code, criminal conviction and sexual in-proprietary and yet the nurse only received an Interim Conditions of Practice and was allowed to continue to work.

Those who have been through the process are up in arms as they have been assessed on areas that have not affected patient safety and yet have had harsher outcomes.

We ask - when will this process be reviewed to ensure it offers a transparent, equitable and fair assessment of a nurse or midwife's Fitness to Practice and does not just depend on a 3 person jury to make unilateral decisions with no peer review.