Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — review hearing
No impairment found
Added to MedicWatch: 17 August 2026Report a correction
What does “no impairment found” mean?
The regulator found no current impairment in this decision. Read the decision for its effect on any existing order and check the official register for the practitioner's current status.
Concerning Sarah Jane Barea, nurse (Nursing and Midwifery Council 91A0327E).
Decision date: 25 June 2026 · Hearing started 25 June 2026
In plain English
The NMC found that nurse Sarah Jane Barea's fitness to practise is no longer impaired. A previous panel had suspended her for two months after finding she gave a patient advice about the Covid-19 vaccine that went against public health guidance. Reviewing that order, the panel said her learning and reflection had addressed the concerns and the risk of repetition was now low. The suspension will lapse on 3 August 2026.
Charges
The charges found proved by the substantive panel were that, while working at the Wadebridge & Camel Estuary Practice, on or around 21 October 2021 she provided advice to Person X on the Covid-19 vaccine contrary to public health advice, namely stating words to the effect that or implying: the vaccine was toxic; that the vaccine caused an increase in Covid-19 cases; that there was a 42% higher death rate due to vaccinations; that four children had died from the vaccination; and that the vaccine should be treated with suspicion due to being made within a year. A further charge, found proved by admission, was that she encouraged patients not to pursue the vaccine and did not advise a patient to undertake a PCR test. Parts of charge 2 are redacted in the published determination.
Findings
This was the first review of a two-month suspension order imposed on 6 May 2026, due to expire at the end of 3 August 2026. The panel carried out a comprehensive review and exercised its own judgement on current impairment. It noted that only a relatively short period had elapsed but that Mrs Barea had undertaken a significant amount of relevant and targeted learning, CPD and reflection, and it commended the quality and relevance of that work. The panel was satisfied she had reflected on evidence-based practice, reliance on recognised national guidance, professional communication, cognitive bias, patient safety and the need to separate personal beliefs from professional responsibilities. It concluded the risk of repetition was now low and that she is not liable to repeat matters of the kind found proved. It found no continuing impairment on either public protection or public interest grounds, and directed that the suspension order lapse upon expiry under Article 30(1) of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001.
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.