A GPhC fitness-to-practise (FtP) committee has found that a prison pharmacy technician who “exchanged letters” of a “romantic nature” with a patient has not “sufficiently demonstrated” that concerns raised in a principal hearing “have been addressed”.
Sheree Danielle Ward, registration number 5102690, was suspended in April after staff at HMP Five Wells found a “romantic” letter describing an escapist “made-up fantasy” in an inmate’s cell.
Read more: Pharmacy tech suspended over romance with prisoner patient
The GPhC acknowledged at the time that Ward had “expressed embarrassment and remorse” over the incident and noted the “alleged difficulties” in her “working life when the conduct took place”.
She was given a six-month suspension for engaging in an “inappropriate relationship” and breaching the “trust and confidence” of her employer.
But at a review hearing earlier this month (November 3), the committee removed her from the register after finding that she had not demonstrated “any further insight” nor shown “any evidence of remediation” and hearing her request to be “voluntarily” removed.
“Huge error”
Ward had been found to have “exchanged letters of a personal and/or romantic nature with a patient of the pharmacy” over a period of a few weeks in early 2023, the GPhC revealed in April.
During the prison’s internal investigation, she told staff that the patient initially wrote her a letter that she responded to, adding that the pair exchanged “maybe three or four” letters in total, the principal hearing document said.
Read more: Pharmacy tech struck off over £600k drug smuggling conviction
Ward told the GPhC that responding to the patient’s letter was a “huge error”, explaining that she had “fallen into” the situation despite it being explained to her when she joined the prison that “residents can be very manipulative”, it added.
She said that descriptions of the patient as “vulnerable” were “an egregious misrepresentation” as he had “been in custody for almost a decade for an extremely violent crime” and used her “as entertainment”.
“Alienation”
Ward was “not in attendance” nor represented at this month’s remote review hearing, but she did provide the committee with a written statement via email.
She had previously implored the committee not to “take [her] registration away”, stressing that she wanted to “take this as an opportunity to learn and grow and recognise vulnerabilities in [herself] and find a healthy way to address them”.
But in this month’s statement, she requested “to leave the register as soon as possible” and said she wanted to “voluntarily remove” herself “permanently”.
Read more: Pharmacy worker jailed after ‘clandestine relationship’ with prison inmate
“I recognise the severity of my transgression and have made steps to understand why this happened and how to prevent it recurring,” it said.
And it added that after spending “a substantial amount of [her] working life exclusively in pharmacy”, she has decided it is “not in [her] interest to continue in the industry”.
Read more: Pharmacy tech suspended for smuggling cannabis into prison ‘in cleavage’
“By no means am I stating it is anyone else’s fault than mine that what happened transpired, but the feeling of alienation from my peers in healthcare settings led me to finding more rapport with prisoners than other pharmacy technicians,” Ward told the committee.
She also said that she was dismissed from her latest position in pharmacy “following the determination being published”.
“I no longer have any desire to pursue any kind of position in or around pharmacy and I wish to put this part of my life behind me,” her statement concluded.
“Risk of harm” to patients
The regulator acknowledged that it would not be “appropriate” to continue Ward’s suspension due to her indication that she “no longer wishes to be a pharmacy technician or engage in any pharmacy regulated activity”.
And the committee found that Ward still “does not have insight” into her actions and “has not remediated her practice”.
Read more: Pharmacist warned not to work ‘unless able to do so safely’
It determined that her fitness to practise remains impaired to maintain “public confidence in the pharmacy profession”, adding that her “return to practice unrestricted would place patients at risk of harm”.
It concluded that “removal from the register is the only appropriate and proportionate outcome”.
Read the determination in full here.
