Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes Jason E Edwards off
The paramedic endangered a critically ill child, mishandled controlled drugs and dishonestly asked a junior colleague to give a false account.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 28 October 2024 · Updated 23 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction
What does “struck off the register” mean?
The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.
Concerning Jason E Edwards, paramedic (Health and Care Professions Council PA37402).
Decision date: 28 October 2024 · Hearing started 21 October 2024 and ended 28 October 2024
In plain English
The HCPTS panel struck paramedic Jason E Edwards off after finding serious patient-safety failings, controlled-drug misconduct and dishonesty in asking a colleague to provide a false account. He showed no insight, remorse, remediation or engagement, and the panel found a high risk of repetition that could not be managed by a lesser sanction.
Charges
Mr Edwards left an emergency care support worker outside his scope caring for a critically ill child, failed to maintain the child's oxygen during transfer, contacted the colleague against instructions and dishonestly asked him to give a false account. He also used offensive language and mishandled controlled drugs, taking them to a pub.
Findings
The panel proved the central allegations and found serious misconduct involving patient-safety risks, dishonesty and failure to work with colleagues. He showed no insight, remorse, remediation or engagement and presented a high repetition risk. Conditions or suspension could not address the attitudinal concerns or public confidence, so the panel ordered striking off.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
No previous regulatory findings; a limited admission to his employer that he had failed to return controlled drugs after his shift and had them with him at a public house. The panel found no personal mitigation.
Aggravating factors
Risk of significant harm to the child patient; lack of insight into the misconduct and its impact on the patient, colleague, profession and public interest; no remorse; no remedial steps; a pattern of failing to work in partnership with colleagues through inappropriate delegation to emergency care support workers and consequent failures to assess and treat patients properly; dishonesty at the higher end of the scale.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions 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.