Latest news with #Patient
Irish Daily Mirror
4 days ago
- Health
- Irish Daily Mirror
Irish midwife who told pregnant women Covid was 'Trojan horse' struck off
A midwife who shared contentious remarks on social media about the Covid pandemic has been removed from the register. Seana Kerr, from Northern Ireland, made comments suggesting that the virus was a 'Trojan horse intend[ed] to introduce a new era for humanity' and that 'babies were being attacked in the womb through vaccination'. She also criticised healthcare professionals and approached a pregnant woman, referred to as Patient A, telling her that if 'she received a flu vaccination this would increase the risk of her baby being stillborn'. According to a report issued on June 3, Patient A and her family 'were caused significant emotional harm'. Details of the findings against Ms Kerr, who was employed by the Southern Health Trust, are included in a ruling from a Nursing and Midwifery Council Fitness to Practise panel. The panel, according to the ruling, 'decided to make a Striking-off order'. This action followed a 'substantive suspension order originally imposed for a period of 12 months by a Fitness to Practise Committee panel on 20 June 2024', reports Belfast Live. The NMC report states that "On or around 14 August 2020, identified yourself as a midwife and advised a member of the public: a. That she should not be wearing a face mask whilst pregnant. b. That wearing a face mask whilst pregnant was reducing the amount of oxygen her baby was receiving. c. That she should not receive a flu vaccination. d. That if she received a flu vaccination this would increase the risk of her baby being stillborn." The NMC panel concluded that: "Your actions at charge 1 were unprofessional in that the advice you purported to give was: a. unsolicited. b. given outside of a clinical relationship. c. contrary to the position of your employer and/or the World Health Organisation and/or mainstream medical opinion and provided without this qualification or caveat." The panel's findings further noted: "Between 27 September 2020 and 19 December 2021, identified yourself as a midwife on social and/or other media and advised the public at large: a. On 27 September 2020, that babies were being attacked in the womb through vaccination of mothers during pregnancy. b. On 04 March 2021, that: i. Professionals who were 'complicit' in the national response to Covid-19 no longer had the 'I didn't know what I didn't know get out clause'. ii. the current health crisis was a Trojan horse intend to introduce a new era for humanity. c. On 19 December 2021, that 'they' had been 'planting the seeds' about Covid-19 over Christmas 2020 by referring to 'some bat in China'." The panel came to a verdict that "in the light of the above, your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of your misconduct". Previously, the original panel investigating Ms Kerr's conduct before her suspension found that "Patient A and their family were put at risk and were caused significant emotional harm as a result of Ms Kerr's misconduct". They remarked: "The panel noted that it is a reasonable expectation of everyone working in a public environment, such as a shop, that they will not be approached and given personal, clinical advice and that such advice would normally only be given during a private clinical appointment or at an antenatal class. "Thus, by accosting Patient A in her workplace without a prior clinical relationship, and without invitation, Ms Kerr exposed her to substantial risk. The panel recognised that during the encounter, being at work, Patient A could scarcely avoid the exchange. Moreover, being pregnant and amidst the Covid-19 pandemic, the panel deemed Patient A to have been at an enhanced vulnerability. "Ms Kerr's misconduct had breached the fundamental tenets of the midwifery profession and therefore brought its reputation into disrepute. Regarding insight, the panel considered that Ms Kerr has demonstrated no insight at all. The panel considered that by making repeated comments online after the concerns were raised to Ms Kerr by the Trust, she has shown a disregard for the Trust's disciplinary process and a total absence of insight or remediation. "The panel was satisfied that the misconduct in this case is capable of being addressed. However, the panel had no information before it that Ms Kerr has taken any steps to reflect on her conduct or shown any insight or to strengthen her practice. Therefore, in light of the above, the panel is of the view that there is a risk of repetition. The panel therefore decided that a finding of impairment is necessary on the grounds of public protection." The NMC acknowledged Ms Kerr's right to freedom of expression as protected under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. However, they pointed out: "However, Ms Kerr's advice and social media comments were given when she identified herself as a midwife, promoting her opinion on matters of clinical importance. Ms Kerr's actions therefore engaged her professional responsibilities as a registered midwife. "The panel considered that the actions of Ms Kerr took place during an exceptionally unusual time, where the entirety of the NHS was mobilised to protect the public from the international Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, by expressing the view that other healthcare professionals, who Ms Kerr was working with in the Trust, were acting in ways which may cause harm, a view Ms Kerr held which was against the recognised guidance at the time, Ms Kerr risked seriously undermining the public confidence in the profession. "It further noted that by making these accusations that Ms Kerr's colleagues may have suffered harm while working in an unprecedented and challenging situation. The panel concluded that in light of the above a finding of impairment on public interest grounds is required." The panel remarked that Ms Kerr "has not shown remorse for her misconduct, nor has she demonstrated any insight into her previous actions" and they believed "of the view that considerable evidence would be required to show that Ms Kerr no longer posed a risk to the public". In their final statement, the panel resolved: "The panel determined that a further period of suspension would not serve any useful purpose in all of the circumstances. The panel determined that it was necessary to take action to prevent Ms Kerr from practising in the future and concluded that the only sanction that would adequately protect the public and serve the public interest was a striking-off order."
Business Wire
03-06-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Patient Protect Releases Landmark Report on the Long-Term Cost of HIPAA Breaches for Small Healthcare Providers
CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--In 2024, over 259 million Americans — roughly 81% of the population — had their protected health information (PHI) compromised. But while media coverage has focused on large hospital systems, a groundbreaking new report from Patient Protect reveals that small, independent medical practices are bearing the brunt of the damage — often without recovery. HIPAA violations don't just cost money. They end careers, destroy trust, and shut down practices. Share The report, The Economics of ePHI Exposure: A Long-Term Impact Model of Healthcare Data Breaches, is the first of its kind to model breach-related losses over a 10-year horizon. It shows how practices without robust HIPAA compliance software or cybersecurity safeguards may face irreversible business consequences. 'We've seen providers close their doors after a single breach,' said Alexander Perrin, CEO of Patient Protect. 'This isn't just a compliance problem — it's a financial crisis hiding in plain sight.' Among the report's key findings: The average cost of a healthcare data breach has reached $9.8 million — nearly twice as high as the cross-industry average of $4.45 million, according to industry reports 70% of patients say they would consider switching providers after a data breach Medical identity theft victims face $13,500 in average costs and 200+ hours of resolution Nearly half of small practices lack sufficient cyber insurance The study introduces a free breach risk calculator, enabling practices to estimate long-term breach exposure based on size, insurance status, and technical posture. 'The healthcare industry must shift from checkbox compliance to real-time, proactive defense,' said Joe Perrin, CTO of Patient Protect. 'Our HIPAA compliance platform is designed to help practices benchmark, improve, and protect — not just report.' Patient Protect will host a live webinar on June 6 to walk through the research, cost model, and security roadmap. Registration is available now at: Healthcare providers can also join the waitlist for Patient Protect's upcoming HIPAA compliance software release, launching this summer.
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Northeast North Dakota, northwest Minnesota hospitals among top critical access hospitals in U.S.
May 21—HILLSBORO, N.D. — Several hospitals in northeast North Dakota and one in northwest Minnesota received spots on the National Rural Health Association's top critical access hospital lists for 2025. The three categories were "2025 Top 20 Critical Access Hospital" overall winners, "Best Practice in Quality" recipients and "Best Practice in Patient Satisfaction" recipients. A press release by Sanford Health said the hospitals are chosen based on the Chartis Rural Hospital Performance INDEX, which has eight indices of performance — inpatient market share, outpatient market share, patient perspective, cost, charge, finance, quality and outcomes. The top 20 critical access hospitals were chosen from the Chartis Center for Rural Health's 2025 top 100 critical access hospital list, the release said. Sanford Hillsboro Medical Center was one of the recipients for Best Practice in Quality, alongside Pembina County Memorial Hospital in Cavalier and Towner County Medical Center in Cando. Jac McTaggart, Sanford Hillsboro's CEO, said the facility takes pride in being a national rural health care leader. "This honor recognizes the dedication of our talented staff members to provide world-class health care to our patients and community," McTaggart said. "It is our mission to provide the highest of care to our communities right here in their own backyards." Regional recipients of Best Practice in Patient Satisfaction included Towner County Medical Center as well as Kittson Healthcare in Hallock, Minnesota. The overall 2025 Top 20 Critical Access Hospital list featured Towner County Medical Center and CHI St. Alexius Health Carrington in Carrington, North Dakota.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Climate
- Yahoo
Invasive plants increase area flood risk
Invasive plants such as Japanese knotweed and Himalayan balsam could increase the risk of flooding in West Yorkshire, a council warned. The non-native species can spread rapidly but die back in the winter, leaving bare ground that floodwater moves across quickly, a Calderdale Council spokesperson said. People are encouraged to report any sightings of invasive plants and to clean their boots after walking in the countryside to stop species from spreading. Scott Patient, the council's member for climate action and housing, said: "Managing invasive species is crucial for reducing flood risk and creating a more biodiverse Calderdale." Invasive plants can cause a particular problem in Calderdale, the council said, as water can flow rapidly down its steep hillsides and into the borough's rivers. Japanese knotweed and giant hogweed require professional treatment, it added, but Himalayan balsam could be easily removed. Boot cleaning stations have been installed at Jerusalem Farm in the Luddenden Valley in a bid to protect endangered white-clawed crayfish from invasive species. The population is under threat due to the introduction of the non-native North American signal crayfish - which spread a disease which kills the native white-clawed crayfish. The cleaning stations have also been put in place at Baitings, Ryburn, Withens Clough and Scammonden reservoirs. Patient added: "Simple steps like using boot cleaning stations or reporting sightings of the most problematic invasive species can make a big difference." Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North. INNS Mapper Eye on Calderdale
Forbes
08-05-2025
- Health
- Forbes
Why It's Difficult For People With Chronic Pain To Gain Their Doctor's Trust
RÜCKENSCHMERZEN sind zu einer der weitverbreitetste Krankheit geworden. Oft laufen die Betroffenen ... More jahrelang von einem Arzt zum nächsten, ohne daß ihr Leiden gelindert werden kann. Dabei wird häufig übersehen, daß Rückenschmerzen auch psychisch bedingt sein können. aka. Rückenschmerzen / Überschrift: WDR SERVICEZEIT GESUNDHEIT. (Photo by kpa/United Archives via Getty Images) Many people with chronic pain find themselves interacting with clinicians who do not seem to trust them. Why is it hard to establish a trusting relationship with your doctor? And what can you do about it? I have been on both sides of the exam table – as a physician caring for people with chronic pain and as a patient slowly coming to realize he is struggling with chronic pain. I would like to share a story I hope will help you understand why it can be difficult to gain the trust of your physicians. It was the early 90s, and I was splitting time between two primary care clinics. One Tuesday, I took care of a man in his mid-30s who had previously sustained a serious back injury, with X-rays showing significant damage to multiple lumbar vertebrae. He told me that he experienced a flare of his lower back that morning after picking something up. The pain was now so bad that I had to help him get on the exam table. After assuring myself he had not suffered any nerve damage, I prescribed him a modest supply of oxycodone. (Remember it was the 90s—that's what we did!) Two days later, I was working in the other clinic and saw the same man in the waiting room, scheduled to see one of my colleagues. I told the colleague that I was familiar with the patient he was about to see and asked my colleague to reach out to me after he finished examining him. The patient told my colleague that he had tweaked his back 'just that morning.' My colleague was inclined to prescribe him narcotics, but I told him about the Tuesday appointment, and we got to digging around for more information. After a few calls, we discovered that this patient was notorious for rotating across clinics seeking narcotics. In retrospect, I can see all kinds of things I did wrong that week. I gave out narcotics too freely to a patient I barely knew. When I discovered his deception, I did not call an addiction expert to see if we could help this man overcome his need for narcotics. Instead, my colleague and I confronted him about his deceptive behavior and sent him home without further treatment. But I am not telling you this story to reflect on my mistakes. Instead, I want to share my feelings. I felt betrayed. I was trying to help this man, earnestly assessing his situation and prescribing a treatment I thought would alleviate his pain. I felt embarrassed that he had so easily fooled me. The dude knew all the right things to say, all the right 'pain postures' to pose in to convince me to prescribe the medications he desired. And I felt angry. I tried to help him and he showed his gratitude by lying to me. Flooded with emotions, I lost the ability to feel compassion for whatever issues were causing this man to spend his time in medical waiting rooms seeking narcotics. More importantly, I became more suspicious of subsequent patients who came to clinic complaining of pain. How do I know they are telling me the truth? Their x-rays look horrendous but how do I know whether they are feeling pain? That wince they display when I raise their leg in the air – how do I know that's not an act? I am telling you this story because someday you may tell a physician about your pain and sense that the doctor does not believe you. Maybe that physician, like me, has been burned. We physicians should not allow a handful of deceitful patients to undermine our trust in the rest of the people we care for. We patients, on the other hand, should recognize that some physicians view us with suspicion not because of anything we said or did, but because of other patients they have encountered, patients who left them feeling angry and embarrassed. We should hope that our physicians greet us with trusting attitudes. But we should not be surprised if building such trust takes time.
