A SCOTS care employee has been struck off after she disadvantaged a service consumer of meals and drugs, and left one other mendacity in their very own urine.

Mandy Brown was discovered responsible of committing a slew of offences over greater than two years between January 2020 and October 2022.

The disgraced care assistant was employed at Bankhouse Care House in Lanark, South Lanarkshire when she was discovered to have uncared for to offer meals to the unnamed service consumer a number of instances.

Brown falsely informed a colleague “don’t give him that, she’s been fed” when she hadn’t, and likewise shouted on the similar consumer while pulling her alongside a hall by his trousers.

She additionally falsely knowledgeable colleagues that acceptable care had been given and medicines administered to the consumer, additionally falsely recording this within the Medical Administration File.

Brown was additional discovered responsible of leaving a unique service consumer in urine-soaked garments, telling a colleague to “simply depart her, we are going to get to her later”.

She then informed a colleague to “stay away from him, he’s nasty” with regard to yet one more service consumer.

It was additionally found that Brown had didn’t register with the Scottish Social Providers Council (SSSC) previous to her employment as a Help Employee at 121 Care at House Restricted, Glasgow in 2022.

Brown’s actions led to a listening to of the SSSC watchdog to think about her health to practise.

The panel agreed that Brown’s health to apply was impaired, stating: “Your behaviour sits on the increased finish of the seriousness scale.

“You could have behaved in a manner which was prone to trigger the service customers in your care bodily, emotional and psychological hurt in a spot the place they need to really feel protected and cared for.

“The apply you demonstrated was abusive and neglectful in the direction of a number of extraordinarily weak service customers.

“You could have intentionally falsified AA’s MAR sheet to say that you just had administered aspirin and atenolol if you had not.

“You didn’t prescribe treatment to AA and subsequently put AA’s well being and wellbeing in danger. You could have additionally tried to mislead your employer by falsifying AA’s MAR sheet.

“By appearing dishonestly you breached the belief and confidence positioned on you by your employer and AA. c. you administered diazepam to AA when he didn’t want it.

“AA can be administered diazepam, if and when he required it, nonetheless you administered this treatment to AA at instances when he didn’t require it.

“There might have been a severe impression on AA’s well being and wellbeing by your actions.

“Service customers have the fitting to anticipate that the care and assist they obtain from social service employees will defend them from hurt, nonetheless your behaviour failed to fulfill the related requirements of apply anticipated of a social service employee and positioned AA at a severe danger of hurt.”

Brown was discovered to have proven no regret with the panel reasoning: “You could have proven little or no perception, remorse, or regret on your behaviour.

“There’s a excessive danger that you’d repeat any such behaviour sooner or later if you happen to had been to proceed to work within the sector.

“Your behaviour demonstrated a sample of behaviour through which you positioned weak service customers at a severe danger of hurt.

“Your behaviour was a breach of the belief positioned in you by your employer and repair customers.

“The SSSC believes that you just current an ongoing public safety danger due to the underlying values difficulty that your behaviour represents.”

The panel agreed {that a} elimination from the register was essentially the most acceptable motion.

They said: “A warning wouldn’t be acceptable as it will not adequately tackle the impairment of your health to apply.

“The behaviour is extraordinarily severe. A warning would give no safety to service customers or the general public.

“The SSSC considers a Removing Order is essentially the most acceptable sanction as it’s each needed and justified within the public curiosity and to take care of the persevering with belief and confidence within the social service occupation and the SSSC because the regulator of the occupation.”