On 20 May 2024, the Health Practitioner’s Disciplinary Tribunal (the Tribunal) heard a charge of professional misconduct laid by the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) appointed by the Nursing Council of New Zealand (the Council) against Ms Tracy Moana Peterson, a registered nurse of Auckland (the Nurse). The hearing took place by way of audio-visual link.

Charge

The charge concerns nine convictions entered in the Auckland District Court against RN Peterson. There are six convictions under section 249(1) of the Crimes Act 1961 of accessing a computer system for a dishonest purpose and three convictions under section 228 of dishonest use of a document. The PCC alleges that these convictions are grounds for discipline under section 100(1)(c) which enables the Tribunal to exercise its disciplinary powers where the practitioner has been convicted of an offence punishable by three months’ imprisonment or more that reflects adversely on her fitness to practice. The Nurse did not dispute the Charge.

Background

In 2019, the Nurse was in her final year of study towards her nursing degree, and in 2020 she was newly registered. The Nurse met the victim through her mother, who worked at a rest home where the victim was a volunteer. The nurse befriended the victim, and she and her mother helped him with daily tasks, though they were never employed as his carers or paid for their assistance.

In the presence of the victim, the Nurse reimbursed herself for legitimate expenses made to improve the state of the victim’s home through online payments using the victim’s bank card and using the online banking platform. She used the victim’s bank accounts to make unauthorised bill payments, transfer funds to her own bank account and withdraw funds for her own expenditure. She also made unauthorised transactions on his bank cards. The Tribunal calculated that the conduct involved over 130 separate transactions and according to the Crown Summary of Facts, the total amount taken by the Nurse was over $59,000.

Findings

The Tribunal found that each of the nine convictions entered against the Nurse reflect adversely on her fitness to practise as the offending was extensive. Not only are they for offences involving dishonesty, but the victim of the offending was a vulnerable, elderly man. 

The Tribunal accepts that the Nurse has been punished by the District Court and it is for that reason that Parliament has stipulated that no fine may be imposed by the Tribunal where a practitioner has been convicted in the criminal courts. However, the Tribunal considers that the Nurse has more work to do to fully understand why her actions reflect adversely on her fitness to practise. The grounds for discipline are established.

Penalty

The Tribunal ordered:

• Suspension of practice for a period of six months
• Conditions on practice following return to practice
• Censure

The Tribunal directed publication of the decision and a summary.