A paramedic who stole thousands of pounds worth of life-saving equipment from an ambulance has been struck off. Rainer Edmund Morgan-Kavanaugh of Mildmay Street, Plymouth, stole a number of medical items from South Western Ambulance Service Foundation Trust’s vehicles sometime between July 1, 2019 and September 30, 2020.
Items included a Schiller AT-101 ECG machine [which records the electrical activity of the heart], an EMMA ETCO2 respiration rate monitor capnograph [which measures CO2 and respiration rate] and an oxygen cannister worth a total of around £3,000.
The then 38-year-old initially pleaded not guilty to one count of theft in Plymouth Crown Court on November 13 2023. But at a hearing on January 18 he switched his plea to guilty and was handed a two year jail term suspended for two years. He was also ordered to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work and carry out 14 Rehabilitation Activity Requirement days.
Now the paramedic has been struck off following a hearing by the Health & Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS), which was held on Tuesday, January 7 and Wednesday January 8.
Morgan-Kavanaugh didn’t attend the tribunal and sent an email to the HCPTS hearing officer in the weeks leading up to the virtual hearing.
The email said: “I have indicated previously that I have no intention of engaging any further with this process. There is no real consequence that the HCPC is able to impose that causes me any concern or will actually alter my life in any meaningful way.
“I do not consider that engaging with this will have any impact on the process at all. However it has the potential to have a significant negative impact on me.
“This has been going for such a long time that it make an absolute mockery of The HCPC and ots [sic] tribunal process. Indicating that this is a system which actually does not exist for any purpose than to serve itself.
“It u [sic] does not consider the health or wellbeing of those whom it feels it has the right to pass judgement on. I actually am completely ambivalent to this all now and have no interest in dealing with Blake Morgan or anybody from the HCPC”.
The panel concluded there were a number of aggravating factors which included Morgan-Kavanaugh’s “breach of trust” with his employer and service users, the fact he stole multiple items and never apologised or made up for his actions. The panel said: “There was potential for service user harm, as found by the Panel at the impairment stage.”
At Morgan Kavanaugh’s criminal court hearing, he was made subject of a Mental Health Treatment Review, which was noticed as a mitigating factor by the tribunal. Another mitigating factor was that he only stole from his employer and not an individual person or multiple people.
Sign up to receive daily news updates and breaking news alerts straight to your inbox for free here.
The panel chose to strike off Morgan-Kavanaugh following what was described as a “savage breach of trust” when “the country needed medical equipment more than it ever had”.
The report said: “The Panel was aware that this [a striking off order] was a sanction of last resort, as set out in paragraph 130 of the Sanctions Policy for serious, persistent, deliberate, or reckless acts involving, among other things, dishonesty, abuse of professional position and/or criminal convictions. The Panel considered that the Registrant’s conviction fell into these specified categories.
“It involved a terrible and ‘savage breach of trust’ at a time when the country needed medical equipment more than it ever had. The Panel was satisfied, based on the nature and gravity of the conviction, together with the Registrant’s lack of insight, that a Striking Off Order was necessary to protect the public, uphold the standards for members of the profession, and to maintain public confidence in the profession.
“Having considered the seriousness of the conviction, together with the Panel’s finding of impairment, the guidance of the Sanctions Policy, and all the circumstances of the case, the Panel was satisfied that the public interest outweighed the Registrant’s interests, and its sanction decision is appropriate and proportionate. The Panel therefore decided that the appropriate and proportionate sanction is a Striking Off Order.”