– in investigation of matter involving transferred nurse

TRANSPARENCY Institute Guyana Incorporated (TIGI) has rapped the Guyana Nursing Council (GNC) and the Guyana Medical Council (GMC) over their alleged failure to disclose details on an investigation involving nurse Sherilyn Marks.

Nurse Marks, who was stationed at Fort Wellington Hospital, was transferred after she exposed the abuse of power by a councillor attached to the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) – a major arm of the coalition government – to access prescription narcotic injections. Nurse Marks was transferred from her post on April 19, 2017 and she remains in that state to date.

TIGI in a press statement on Saturday, said that the GNC, the GMC and the Public Health Ministry had promised to launch an investigation to determine where Nurse Marks had breached any of the public service rules, but to date an update on the investigation is still to be given.
“These investigations would have uncovered whether Ms. Marks was in breach of the public service rules, whether doctors were complicit and whether the actions against her were inappropriate,” TIGI stated.
TIGI wrote to both the GNC (delivered on November 20, 2017) and the GMC (initially delivered on December 21, 2017) to enquire about the status of investigations.
In those letters, TIGI sought to get an update on the status of any investigation and on the actions that the GNC had taken in relation to the matter.

“We would like to know, specifically, how the investigation has progressed to date and whether it has been closed. We would also like to know whether Ms. Marks was found guilty or cleared of breaching any rules or codes of ethics,” a section of one of the letters read.

According to TIGI, the GNC responded (received on December 18, 2017) to indicate that it is not in a position to provide an update.

“This response failed to even indicate whether or not investigations were initiated. We find this to be appalling. Even if the council does not wish to divulge details of the investigation, there is nothing preventing it from indicating whether or not there was an investigation and whether or not it was completed. There is a difference between confidentiality and secrecy. The former is thought-out and key information can be deleted; the latter lacks such finesse,” the transparency organisation stated.

“But this response, or lack thereof, is more than that received from the GMC to date,” it added.

On January 10, 2018, TIGI contacted the council and it was then revealed that the letter delivered on December 21, 2017 was misplaced.

“We then sent an electronic copy on January 10 and receipt was acknowledged the following day. We followed-up by email on February 8, 2018 (no response) and again on February 28, 2018 and a response was received on February 28, 2018 indicating that the matter was still engaging the attention of the council. To date (now May 26, 2018) we have not received a response to the content of the letter from the GMC,” TIGI disclosed.

TIGI believes that the failure of both the GNC and the GMC to take action in this matter—or at the very least, to respond to its legitimate questions on behalf of the Guyanese public—smacks of a cover-up.