Colorado Case Highlights Needs for Nursing Background Checks

By Michael Klazema on 5/20/2016

In the education sector, there is a practice known as "passing the trash," where schools allow teachers or administrators accused of sexual misconduct to resign quietly rather than face arrest or other legal ramifications. Needless to say, this practice is extremely harmful, as it allows sexual predators to find work elsewhere and keep abusing kids. Unfortunately, in some areas, it seems a similar practice exists for nurses.

According to a report recently published by CBS News, there is a male nurse in the Denver, Colorado, who is currently facing numerous charges for sexually assaulting women while on the job. One story cited in the article involved a woman who went to the hospital on Christmas Eve 2013 for abdominal pain. She received a dose of morphine to help with the pain and then fell unconscious. When she woke up, a male nurse was groping and kissing her. Later, the nurse found and friended her on Facebook.

It was a year and a half before the woman reported the incident. When she did, police started investigating the male nurse in question. They found eight other women who claimed to have had similar experiences with the man. They also found that the accusations weren't limited to Poudre Valley Hospital—where the Christmas Eve 2013 incident occurred.

On the contrary, the male nurse had been fired from three different hospitals by the time he was finally arrested. He'd also been reported for an "unspecified incident" at a Nebraska hospital in 2013, shortly before the Christmas Eve incident. Some of his victims even reported his misconduct to the police. None of these events mattered. Police evidently never pursued charges against the man and the hospitals where he worked seemingly failed to notify state licensing boards or future employers. At very least, no state licensing board ever took action against the nurse. As a result, an alleged predator was able to gain access to one victim after another.

How could these incidents have been prevented? The hospitals probably could have run stronger background checks, seeking out information from the suspect's former employers. Because no one pressed charges, the man didn't have a criminal record, nor were there any warrants out for his arrest. However, judging by how many hospitals employed and then fired him, a simple reference or verification check should have found some answers.

Arguably the bigger problem is that hospitals can opt not to disclose something like one of these incidents to the proper authorities. The CBS News report indicated that a hospital or two may have reported the suspect to Colorado's nursing board, but also noted that the board always keeps reports confidential until they decide to take disciplinary action. The nursing board definitely never took disciplinary action and has refused to disclose whether or not the male nurse in question was ever the subject of a complaint or investigation.

Two things are for sure, though. First, Colorado does not have any laws on the books that demand hospitals to report employee misconduct allegations to the state regulatory body. Second, the Colorado nursing board does not run background checks on license applicants. As a result, it's easy for nurses who have been fired over misconduct allegations to find new jobs without appropriate amount of scrutiny. A law demanding better sharing of misconduct allegations between hospitals would help to prevent accused predators from landing new jobs.


Industry News

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.