Derrick Kent 0507707

Allegations and Plea

The College alleged that the Member was found guilty of a criminal offence relevant to his suitability to practise, namely, assault, and that he failed to provide the College with details of his finding of guilt.

The Member admitted to the allegations, and the College and the Member jointly submitted an agreement to the following facts.

Evidence

The Member’s youngest child was admitted to the hospital for an asthma attack and his care was assigned to a Personal Support Worker (PSW). When the Member found his young child unattended, he confronted the PSW and the situation escalated. The Member was found guilty of assault. The trial judge found that the Member grabbed the PSW by the throat and punched her a number of times. The Member was given a conditional discharge, six months’ probation, and community service, and he was ordered to attend anger management courses. The Member reported this finding of guilt to the College.

In another unrelated incident, the Member and his teenage child got into an argument. The Member threw his teenage child on the floor and slapped her a number of times. The Member was found guilty of assault, and given a conditional discharge and 12 months’ probation. Although the Member reported the charges to the College, he failed to report the finding of guilt to the College.

Finding

The Panel found that the Member committed professional misconduct as alleged, and that his conduct would be regarded as dishonourable and unprofessional. The Panel noted that the conduct demonstrated serious disregard for the Member’s professional obligations and demonstrated an element of moral failing.

Submissions on Order

The College sought an oral reprimand and a three-month suspension. The Member would be required to complete specified remediation activities in preparation for a series of meetings with a nursing expert. For a period of 12 months from the date the Member returns to the practice of nursing, the Member would be required to advise the College of his employers, and provide employers with a copy of the Panel’s decision and reasons. The Member would only practise for an employer who agreed to advise the College if the Member breached the standards of practice of the profession.

Panel Order

The Panel accepted the joint submission as fair, reasonable and in the public interest. The Member cooperated with the College by agreeing to the facts and proposed penalty. The penalty satisfies the principles of specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation and remediation, and public protection.

Read the full decision

Page last reviewed December 16, 2015