Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — substantive hearing

NMC panel strikes off nurse Dean Thomson over bullying and dishonesty findings

The Nursing and Midwifery Council's Fitness to Practise Committee has struck nurse Dean William Thomson off the register after he admitted verbally abusing patients, bullying colleagues and acting dishonestly about a patient safety process at a homeless healthcare service.

MedicWatch editorial · Published 22 July 2026 · Updated 29 July 2026

Erasure (struck off the register)

Added to MedicWatch: 29 July 2026Report a correction

What does “struck off the register” mean?

Being struck off (the regulator calls this "erasure") removes the practitioner from the register. They are no longer permitted to practise this profession in the UK. Erasure can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but is otherwise indefinite.

Concerning Dean William Thomson, nurse (Nursing and Midwifery Council 92Y0059E).

Decision date: 22 July 2026 · Hearing started 22 July 2026

In plain English

The NMC's Fitness to Practise Committee found that Dean William Thomson's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct. He admitted charges of verbal abuse towards two patients, bullying and obstructive behaviour towards colleagues, poor record keeping, and dishonestly claiming he was unaware a patient had to be seen by two staff members. The panel accepted a consensual panel determination, found no mitigating features, and imposed a striking-off order with an interim suspension order for 18 months.

Charges

That the registrant, a registered Advanced Nurse Practitioner, whilst employed by Homeless Healthcare Service: on an occasion in 2021 told Patient B to "fuck off"; in respect of Colleague A, on 19 January 2022 told them to go home and that they were not needed when a clinic was in their name, told them not to come into the clinical room, and made them feel unwanted and belittled them; between 20 January and 11 February 2022 in relation to Colleague B, ignored a request to assist in putting stock away, refused to assist a practice nurse with using the ECG machine, and deliberately acted in an obstructive manner by moving patients from his allocated list back to the triage list; told Patient C to have a shower because she smelled, that she was childish, that she was pathetic and to grow up; in relation to Colleague C, spoke to her in a tone that caused her to cry, called her "receptionist" rather than surgery manager, told her a receptionist would do a much better job in her role, and discussed her mental health in the presence of a patient; in July 2021 told Colleague D he was not capable of doing a clinic and needed to go back upstairs; on 10 and/or 11 February 2022 failed to document a departure from agreed processes in relation to Patient A, failed to accurately record that Patient A was acting in an aggressive and/or threatening manner during the consultation, and failed to ensure Patient A was seen by two members of medical staff at a time; and claimed he was unaware that Patient A must be seen by two members of medical staff, which was dishonest.

Findings

The panel accepted a Consensual Panel Determination agreed between the NMC and Mr Thomson, signed by Mr Thomson on 12 March 2026 and the NMC on 20 March 2026, and found all charges proved by way of his admissions. Exercising its own independent judgement, the panel determined that the verbal abuse to both patients and colleagues together with dishonesty amounted to serious professional misconduct, and endorsed the parties' agreement that provisions of the Code including 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 2.1, 3.4, 8.2, 8.5, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 17.1, 20.1, 20.2, 20.3, 20.5 and 20.8 had been breached. The panel found his fitness to practise currently impaired on both public protection and public interest grounds, noting that attitudinal concerns are inherently difficult to remediate and that Mr Thomson had not provided any insight or remediation. At sanction it concluded his actions were significant departures from the standards expected of a registered nurse and fundamentally incompatible with him remaining on the register, and imposed a striking-off order together with an interim suspension order for 18 months to cover any appeal period.

Mitigating factors

The panel found that there are no mitigating features in this case.

Aggravating factors

The panel took into account the following aggravating features: the impact of Mr Thomson's actions on both patients and colleagues, in that his actions increased risk posed to both patients and staff members; the repetitive nature of his actions, over the span of a number of years; and the element of dishonesty in respect of the incident with Patient A, as well as the bullying, discriminatory and harassing behaviour, which is indicative of embedded behaviour/attitudinal issues which is more difficult to remediate.

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.