Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — substantive hearing
NMC panel imposes three-year caution on midwife Susan Squibb over haemorrhage response failings
A Nursing and Midwifery Council panel has imposed a three-year caution order on midwife Susan Marie Squibb after finding she failed to recognise and escalate an obstetric haemorrhage and did not keep adequate records, while concluding the risk of repetition is low.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 16 April 2026 · Updated 11 July 2026
Warning (formally warned) — 3 years
Added to MedicWatch: 11 July 2026Report a correction
What does “formally warned” mean?
A formal warning is a note on the practitioner's record. It does not restrict practice but tells the public that the regulator considered the conduct to have fallen below expected standards.
Concerning Susan Marie Squibb, midwife (Nursing and Midwifery Council 80J1005E).
Decision date: 16 April 2026 · Hearing started 7 April 2026 and ended 16 April 2026
In plain English
The NMC's Fitness to Practise Committee found that midwife Susan Marie Squibb failed to recognise and escalate an obstetric haemorrhage in 2016, failed to carry out or record observations after a postpartum haemorrhage in 2018, and kept inadequate records. The panel found her fitness to practise impaired on public interest grounds only, noting her insight and low risk of repetition, and imposed a three-year caution order.
Charges
In relation to Patient B on 16 September 2016: failing to recognise and/or take appropriate action following an obstetric haemorrhage by not escalating blood loss; not accurately measuring the birthing pool temperature; not assessing contractions or monitoring the fetal heart rate at appropriate intervals; leaving Patient B unattended with the placenta in situ; failing to maintain clear and accurate records (contractions, fetal heart rate recorded as a range, no APGAR score recorded); and not taking an APGAR score. In relation to Patient A on 21 February 2018: failing to recognise and/or take appropriate action following an obstetric postpartum haemorrhage (emergency bell, timely suturing of an episiotomy, timely intravenous Tranexamic Acid, clinical observations); and not completing a postpartum haemorrhage pro-forma.
Findings
The panel found proved charges 1a (failure to recognise and escalate an obstetric haemorrhage in relation to Patient B), 1f(i) and 1f(ii) (inadequate documentation of contractions and fetal heart rate), 1f(iii) by admission (no APGAR score recorded), and 2a(iv) (failure to conduct or record clinical observations following Patient A's postpartum haemorrhage). Charges 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1g, 2a(i)-(iii) and 2b were found not proved. The panel determined the proved facts amounted to serious professional misconduct and that fitness to practise is currently impaired on public interest grounds only, finding the risk of repetition low. A caution order for three years was imposed; the panel rejected the NMC's submission that a striking-off order was appropriate as wholly disproportionate.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Shown insight in relation to these concerns
Aggravating factors
Potential harm caused to a patient
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Nursing and Midwifery Council determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.