Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — substantive hearing
NMC orders Romulus Berejena struck off after sexual misconduct findings
The panel found misconduct involving a patient and colleague. One allegation about intended effect was not proved; developing insight did not outweigh the panel’s concerns.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 25 August 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 22 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 Romulus Berejena, nurse (Nursing and Midwifery Council 15I1121E).
Decision date: 25 August 2026 · Hearing started 18 August 2026 and ended 25 August 2026
In plain English
The NMC panel decided to strike Romulus Berejena off for sexual misconduct involving a patient and a colleague. It rejected the allegation that he intended to violate the colleague’s dignity or create an offensive environment, while finding that his conduct had that effect. The panel recognised developing insight but found continuing impairment and concluded that suspension would be insufficient. A separate interim suspension covers the appeal period.
Charges
Charges concerned contacting a patient through Instagram without clinical justification, asking her on a date and sending voice notes in May 2024, with alleged sexual motivation; and an unwanted comment and kiss involving a colleague in July 2022, including their sexual nature, intention and effect.
Findings
Charges 1a–d, 2, 3a–b, 4a, 4b and 4d were proved. Charge 4c, alleging an intention to violate the colleague’s dignity or create an offensive environment, was not proved; the sexual nature, unwanted character and effect were proved. The panel found misconduct and current impairment on public protection and public interest grounds. It recognised developing insight and potentially remediable misconduct, finding insufficient evidence of a deep-seated attitudinal problem, but incomplete remediation and integrity concerns about the account advanced in defence. It ordered striking off, with a separate 18-month interim suspension; absent appeal, striking off takes effect 28 days after written notice.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
• You made admissions to a number of the charges at the outset of the hearing. • You ultimately accepted the panel's findings. • You demonstrated developing insight. Your most recent reflective material demonstrated a greater understanding of the position of trust held by a registered nurse, the impact of your conduct on others, and the importance of maintaining appropriate professional boundaries.
Aggravating factors
• Patient A was particularly vulnerable at the time of the misconduct. She was receiving urgent assessment and treatment in the Accident and Emergency Department, was visibly wearing a neck brace and was undergoing clinical assessment. • You abused the position of trust placed in you as a registered nurse. As a registered professional, you were expected to understand and maintain appropriate professional boundaries. • The misconduct involved serious sexual boundary violations towards both a patient and a professional colleague in different professional contexts. • You breached Patient A’s privacy and misused social media. • In relation to the allegation concerning Colleague B, you maintained a detailed account which the panel found to be untrue and you persisted in that account until findings of fact were made. • In advancing that account, you effectively alleged that Colleague B was lying. The panel considered that this compounded the seriousness of the misconduct, demonstrated a failure to take responsibility for your actions, and had the potential to cause further distress to Colleague B.
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.