facing dismissal for misconduct

jobbingmusician

I think/hope that they have little option than to take you to disciplinary, as they have to treat all employees alike. However, your neurology reports should prevent anything too serious happening as a result of this disciplinary.

Be very clear what you are arguing, though - if you accessed an illicit database by accident there is no point in bringing forward the argument that your moral judgement was impaired. (This would be a good argument if you had done it deliberately.) Having impaired moral judgement might explain why you didn't immediately exit the DB once you realised what had happened.

What treatment (if any) are you receiving or have you received for this tumour? I ask this because your employer will want reassurance that this was an out of character thing to have happened (even if it was just a mistake) and that IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. The more you can provide this reassurance, the more they will be able to be lenient with you.

Manxman_in_exile

jobbingmusician wrote: »

I think/hope that they have little option than to take you to disciplinary, as they have to treat all employees alike. However, your neurology reports should prevent anything too serious happening as a result of this disciplinary. I would certainly hope so too.

Be very clear what you are arguing, though - if you accessed an illicit database by accident there is no point in bringing forward the argument that your moral judgement was impaired. I don't think it was "illicit" rather OP was not authorised to access it. My question would be then, how was it possible for her to access it by "accident"? (This would be a good argument if you had done it deliberately.) Having impaired moral judgement might explain why you didn't immediately exit the DB once you realised what had happened. I'm not sure there's any question of moral judgement. The OP claims she was not even aware of the alleged breach until it had been flagged up on an audit.

What treatment (if any) are you receiving or have you received for this tumour? I ask this because your employer will want reassurance that this was an out of character thing to have happened (even if it was just a mistake) and that IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. The more you can provide this reassurance, the more they will be able to be lenient with you. I agree with this, although I do wonder if it might add other, unavoidable, issues for the OP. I'm thinking prognosis, treatment, possible sickness absence for treatment etc. And what I mean is that the OP's health is more important than any misconduct issues at work. Also, if OP's work performance is adversely affected by their neurological condition, what action is a NHS employer likely to take? Having said that, I still think OP has to be honest with OH and her employers about her condition[/QUOTE]


Having read this thread again I'm not clear what OP has done (assuming their account is accurate).


If they have intentionally accessed record s they should not have done - that is a problem.


If they have unintentionally and unknowingly accessed records (perhaps as a result of their neurological condition) that may still be a problem but should be a mitigating factor together with their neurological condition.


But, if the OP has inadvertently accessed a "database" or "system" that they should not have had access to, I do not see how that could amount to misconduct, whether her condition contributed to this or not. They were not even aware of what they had done until it was flagged up by a subsequent audit report. This sounds like a problem for the trust to me, not the OP. How can unauthorised users gain access to NHS systems/databases?


(PS - I am taking the OP at face value regarding references to databases and "systems". I may be being over-generous but I read the OP as saying they did not make a data input error, but rather that they inadvertently and unintentionally gained access to a system or database that they should not have had access to. If that is so, then I think the trust has an IT problem. Having said that, I do not see how this could happen inadvertently).

aife

I'm a bit confused as to what exactly she's done. My trust has policies about people not accessing records of patients they are not working with and needing a legitimate reason to access records.
The OP says she accessed the wrong part of a system , not the wrong (patient's) record. She also talks about going to see patients so must be clinical staff , and therefore entitled to look at notes ?
As far as disciplinary goes , sadly this is the reality in the NHS today. Disciplinary action is raised at the drop of a hat , to a lot of managers it's the automatic response rather than a last resort

TELLIT01

I may have misinterpreted the OP with my reading that they had accessed the wrong record on a system to which they normally do have access. That as I said before is very easily done.
However, if they accessed a system to which they were not supposed to able to get into it's an entirely different matter. There are two likely scenarios for that to happen - 1. OP used somebody elses userid and password, and there's nothing to suggest that anywhere in the topic. 2. A system security failure has occurred which either directly or indirectly allowed the OP into other systems.
If it's 1 then the OP would have some very serious questions to answer, if 2 I don't see that they are at fault beyond putting in the wrong information to identify the patient.

Manxman_in_exile

aife wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to what exactly she's done. My trust has policies about people not accessing records of patients they are not working with and needing a legitimate reason to access records.
The OP says she accessed the wrong part of a system , not the wrong (patient's) record. She also talks about going to see patients so must be clinical staff , and therefore entitled to look at notes ?
As far as disciplinary goes , sadly this is the reality in the NHS today. Disciplinary action is raised at the drop of a hat , to a lot of managers it's the automatic response rather than a last resort

Those were my exact thoughts on reading the OP.

Manxman_in_exile

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I may have misinterpreted the OP with my reading that they had accessed the wrong record on a system to which they normally do have access. That as I said before is very easily done.
However, if they accessed a system to which they were not supposed to able to get into it's an entirely different matter. There are two likely scenarios for that to happen - 1. OP used somebody elses userid and password, and there's nothing to suggest that anywhere in the topic. 2. A system security failure has occurred which either directly or indirectly allowed the OP into other systems.
If it's 1 then the OP would have some very serious questions to answer, if 2 I don't see that they are at fault beyond putting in the wrong information to identify the patient.

That's how I read the OP. However, I'm assuming that their account of their actions is accurate. (And if it isn't accurate, that may simply be down to lack of understanding the "systems" they use or the terminology employed, not an attempt to mislead).


Unless the OP comes back with clarification, it's impossible to say.

TELLIT01

The problem can come with the interpretation of 'gross misconduct'. When I worked at DWP simply sending post to a wrong address would be classed as that irrespective of the content.
We actually had once instance where a change of address was advised after a paper based claim was received, but before it was processed. The change form was folded and put in with the claim papers. The person processing the claim worked from the claim papers and didn't see the change form. They came very close to being given the boot on the grounds of gross misconduct over that.

kazzah

can't offer any advice for the OP about the misconduct situation- but my brother had a brain tumour which affected his whole personality and made him unaware of things he had done, such as getting undressed in his office ( he thought he was getting into the shower at home - so I have huge sympathies with the OP and hope that s/he gets the best of treatment and gets better soon x

gettingready

I accessed files that I should not have accessed.

the files accessed where actually to update information for a patient, I updated the information into the wrong system, but by doing this into the wrong system it gives you access to other information,although I did not access other information Ijust added notes ,I cant prove this and its considered a breach in policy.

Kencolady - can you describe exactly what do you mean by that?

I am sorry but it is not clear from your post at all.

I have worked as clinical systems trainer for about 15 years and find it a bit difficult to understand as all access to every system was role based.

Which system were you using? Did you look up the patient by MRI or NHS numbed or by DOB? IN case of DOB - this could come up with multiple patients and easy enough to click on the wrong one.

Can you please describe exactly what happened? Without all the other info, just the facts of what happened and what are you accused of?

kencolady

The system I use we have to access the computer with a card, I have done this for 5 years but when you get onto the system the computer screen then has lots of different areas I only ever access the patient areas I need to in order to update my patient files for a visit etc, and If I access the other areas ie click the tab heading it should deny me access but having never done that before I had never known I had access.

On the particular occasion I had clicked the wrong one and went on to write what was needed for the patient however was then able to see various other information if I wanted to such as blood results, MRI results, scan results, other care providers involved with the patient etc which in my role im not allowed to do, at the time I wrote the notes and signed off not even taking notice of any thing else on the screens and that can be proven in the fact I did not access anything else. I have since argued and have been told im correct in the the fact my card should not have been given full access and this was an error with admin not me when my card was renewed last year.

However the Investigation has been stopped at the moment while they look into that, so fingers crossed thats where it will now stop.