PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY AUTUMN

Running head: PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY AUTUMN
CASE LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

CASE LAW1
Introduction
Registered nurses (RN) are frontline healthcare professionals who deliver effective
healthcare services. They are accountable for delivering the right practices of services and the
safety of the patients. Therefore, nursing professionals need to follow policies to practice and
administer according to relevant standards. There is a chance of cancellation or suspension of
registration of nursing professionals if they conduct any illegal practice or malpractice or any
other events that would impact on the patient safety or the administration of the healthcare
settings or hospitals. This paper would discuss a case law on Mr Zachary Hollis. This essay
intends to examine the case and relevant evidence-based approaches for preventing the
adverse effects by the nursing professionals.
Case Reference: Caselaw.nsw.gov.au. (2020)
Action
Mr Zachary Hollis is a former registered nurse, and he has been alleged for the
misconduct of hid unprofessional behaviours. He was accused and held guild against two
complaints. Mr. Zachary Hollis was enlisted as a registered nurse between 2011 until the give
up of his enlistment nearby 29 January 2016. The expert was first utilized as a registered
nurse at Mirrabrook Mental Health Unit. The first complaints are that Mr Hollis has shown
unsatisfactory professional behaviour which is misconduct under s139B. The second
complaints were of guilty of professional misconduct under s139E. Both the complaint was
concerning the patient A. Patient A was suffering from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, in
addition to these symptoms, she also has a record of alcohol abuse, substance abuse along
with considered self-harm. The patient was admitted to the Mirrabrook mental health unit
within 10 to 18 October 2012. Later, she was moved to the Eloura East admission as she was
imposed with a further six-month community treatment plan.

CASE LAW2
The major action of Mr Hollis was he has failed to recognise and identify proper
professional boundaries. He met with the patient outside the healthcare settings in the
shopping centre and indulged in social conversation. Further, he has provided his phone
number to patient A, and it resulted in a continual conversation between them both in-person
and by phone. Furthermore, during patient A's self-discharge, he went to collect her from the
hospital and escorted her to his own house. He had also asked her to stay for two evenings
and led to building a personal relationship. He also maintained a sexual relationship with
patient A. In addition to this, he had also used cannabis and accessed electronic medical
records of her without any authority or permissions.
Mr Hollis did not mention about his relationship with patient A to his supervisors or
senior colleagues. He had lied that he knows the patient A before admission of both the
healthcare settings and also seek direction from his employer. Later, when he failed in
justifying his relationship with the patient, A. he had written false statements to his practice
unit. Therefore, the professional practice unit (PPU) was misled by his action.
Other External factors
In this case, there was no such systematic based error as it was completely the
misbehaviour and irresponsible act from Mr Hollis. He voluntarily made relationships with
patient A and made crossed the professional boundaries with her. The professional practice
unit could not identify and control the activities of Mr Hollis as he has given a false statement
to the PPU, which has led to misguiding them. Mr Hollis did not read any report of patient A
when he was on duty or in-charge of the patient. Thus, when a patient wanted to discharge
herself from the mental healthcare settings, Mr Hollis did not find any necessity to find out
the medical history of the patients. Earlier, patient A was admitted to the mental health
settings and then was shifted for two months in acute mental settings. Even though, Mr Hollis