Nursing and Midwifery Council determination — substantive hearing
NMC orders Beebee Rehanah Roopun struck off after safeguarding disclosure case
The NMC found impairment after High Court remittal, citing dishonest safeguarding omissions. It acknowledged positive clinical references but found limited insight and a continuing risk of repetition.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 4 September 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 Beebee Rehanah Roopun, nurse (Nursing and Midwifery Council 90D1551E).
Decision date: 4 September 2026 · Hearing started 1 September 2026 and ended 4 September 2026
In plain English
The NMC's Fitness to Practise Committee ordered Beebee Rehanah Roopun to be struck off for dishonest failure to disclose safeguarding information during a fostering application. The case returned after the High Court set aside an earlier no-impairment decision. The panel acknowledged positive clinical references and some insight but found continuing risk and insufficient remediation. Separate dishonesty about notifying fostering deregistration had not been proved. Interim suspension covers the appeal period.
Charges
The case concerned dishonest failure to disclose safeguarding information during a joint fostering application. Earlier findings proved the application non-disclosure and dishonesty, and failure to notify the employer of fostering deregistration; failure to notify the NMC was not proved and dishonesty concerning the deregistration notification was not proved. After a PSA appeal, the High Court added a misconduct finding for charge 1 and set aside the earlier no-impairment decision, remitting impairment to a new NMC panel.
Findings
The NMC panel found impairment on public protection and public interest grounds, then ordered striking off. It found repeated dishonest omissions prevented proper safeguarding assessments and put children and vulnerable adults at risk. It acknowledged a long career, positive clinical references, no concerns about current clinical competence and some insight, but considered personal responsibility and remediation insufficient to address repetition risk. Misconduct at this stage concerned charges 1 and 3, following the High Court remittal. An 18-month interim suspension covers the appeal period; absent an appeal, striking off replaces it 28 days after written notification. Allegations concerning another person are not findings against Ms Roopun.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
• Engaged with the NMC process • Positive testimonials from the workplace
Aggravating factors
• Limited insight into failings and how your misconduct impacted on those fostered under your care • Conduct that put children and vulnerable adults under your care at risk of harm • Lack of candour from a senior nurse • Senior position and should have been a role model to the nursing profession • Dishonesty over a period of time even when confronted by a fostering agency • Personal and financial gain from the joint dishonest misconduct
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.