On This Page
Tara Frater, 9729781
The member admitted that she engaged in professional misconduct when she called in sick at one facility but worked at a different facility on 48 occasions. On 43 of these occasions, she was paid by both facilities.
The member denied allegations related to the care she provided to two patients at the correctional facility in which she was employed as a nurse. A panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) found that upon the admission of one patient to the facility, the member failed to appropriately assess the patient, failed to initiate screening tools for alcohol and/or drug withdrawal, failed to identify the patient as being at risk of alcohol and/or drug withdrawal and failed to inform her colleagues that the patient should be monitored. The patient was found unresponsive in their cell the following day and pronounced deceased. The Panel dismissed the allegation related to the assessment of the second patient. However, the Panel found that the evidence showed a lack of proper documentation for both patients.
Discipline Committee’s Findings
The Panel found the Member committed the following professional misconduct, in that she:
- contravened a standard of practice of the profession or failed to meet the standards of practice of the profession;
- misappropriated property from a workplace;
- failed to keep records as required; and
- engaged in conduct, relevant to the practice of nursing, that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as dishonourable and/or unprofessional.
Discipline Committee’s Order
The Panel made an order that included the following:
- an oral reprimand
- a 4-month suspension; and
- terms, conditions, and limitations including:
- attending at least 2 meetings with a Regulatory Expert; and
- employer notification for 18 months.
The Panel noted that the Member accepted responsibility and agreed that some areas of her documentation were lacking, and that she admitted to several allegations and took responsibility for her actions. The Panel also considered that the member was patient-focussed and advocating for her patients, and that there was no evidence that the Member had ever been disciplined or reprimanded by her employer regarding her performance, assessments, care plans, or documentation.