EMT dismissed for forming relationship with vulnerable patient: dismissal upheld
An emergency medical technician with 12 years' service was fairly dismissed after accessing a patient's records and forming a relationship with her. The tribunal found the trust's decision was within the range of reasonable responses.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #gross-misconduct
- #patient-relationship
- #data-breach
- #vulnerable-patient
- #mitigation-considered
- #appeal-on-paper
Key facts
- Andrew Pickering was an Emergency Medical Technician with 12 years' service and an exemplary record.
- He accessed a patient's electronic records without authorisation and formed a personal/sexual relationship with her.
- The patient was vulnerable, with a history of mental health issues and alcohol misuse.
- The disciplinary panel considered mitigation including his marital breakdown, daughter's illness, and remorse.
- The panel decided to dismiss for gross misconduct, and the appeal upheld the decision.
- Andrew Pickering died by suicide the day after the dismissal decision.
Timeline
-
Initial meeting with patient A
Andrew Pickering met patient A while walking his dog in Ripley; they spoke occasionally.
-
Attended patient A as part of 999 call-out
Pickering attended patient A's home in Harrogate as an Emergency Medical Technician. He later accessed her electronic patient record (EPR) without authorisation.
-
Contact via LinkedIn and WhatsApp
Pickering contacted patient A via LinkedIn after searching for her online. They exchanged messages and began a relationship.
-
Second 999 call-out to patient A
Pickering attended patient A's home in uniform during another call-out. A friend questioned his presence, leading to a report of misconduct.
-
Redeployment and investigation started
Pickering was redeployed to a non-patient-facing role and informed of the investigation.
-
Relationship ended
Pickering and patient A agreed to end their relationship via WhatsApp.
-
Fact-finding interview
Pickering was interviewed by Simon Butterworth; he admitted accessing the EPR and the relationship.
-
Invitation to disciplinary hearing
Pickering was invited to a disciplinary panel hearing regarding four allegations.
-
Disciplinary hearing and dismissal
The disciplinary panel, chaired by Pauline Archibald, found gross misconduct and summarily dismissed Pickering.
-
Death of Andrew Pickering
Andrew Pickering died by suicide.
-
Appeal outcome
The appeal panel upheld the dismissal decision after a paper review.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the trust acted reasonably in dismissing the employee for gross misconduct, considering the investigation, the mitigation presented, and whether dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses for a conduct dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal. It found that the trust had a genuine belief in the employee's misconduct based on a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal was a reasonable sanction in the circumstances.
Key reasons:
- The employee accessed a patient's electronic records without authorisation and formed a personal/sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient.
- The disciplinary panel considered mitigation (marital breakdown, daughter's illness, remorse) but concluded that the breach of trust was fundamental.
- The appeal process, though conducted on paper, was not procedurally flawed.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for gross misconduct even when the employee has a long, unblemished record, if the conduct involves a serious breach of trust or patient safety.
- Mitigating factors such as personal stress or remorse do not automatically make dismissal unreasonable; the employer must weigh them but can still decide to dismiss.
- An appeal conducted on paper (without a hearing) can be procedurally fair if the employee had the opportunity to make written submissions and the decision-maker was independent.
- Accessing confidential patient records without authorisation is a serious breach of trust that can justify summary dismissal in healthcare settings.
A tragic case with a clear legal outcome
This case involves an emergency medical technician (EMT) with 12 years of exemplary service who formed a relationship with a vulnerable patient after attending her home as part of a 999 call-out. He accessed her electronic patient record without authorisation and later contacted her via LinkedIn and WhatsApp. The relationship was discovered when a friend of the patient questioned his presence during a second call-out.
The trust investigated, and the disciplinary panel found gross misconduct. The employee was summarily dismissed. Tragically, he died by suicide the day after the dismissal decision. His brother brought the unfair dismissal claim on his behalf.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal carefully examined whether the trust acted reasonably. It noted that the disciplinary panel had considered the employee's mitigation—including his marital breakdown, his daughter's illness, and his remorse—but concluded that the breach of trust was too serious to allow continued employment. The panel had also considered alternatives to dismissal but decided that none were appropriate given the nature of the misconduct.
The appeal was conducted on paper, with the employee submitting written grounds. The tribunal found that this was not procedurally unfair, as the employee had a full opportunity to make his case and the appeal decision-maker was independent.
Why the result matters
This case reinforces that healthcare employers can dismiss for gross misconduct even when the employee has a long, clean record, if the conduct involves a fundamental breach of trust—especially around patient confidentiality and vulnerability. It also shows that tribunals will respect an employer's decision to dismiss if the investigation is thorough and the decision is within the range of reasonable responses, even where there are strong mitigating factors.
For employees, the lesson is clear: accessing patient records without authorisation and forming personal relationships with patients is likely to be treated as gross misconduct, regardless of length of service or personal circumstances.
Similar cases
Community nurse dismissed for gross misconduct: professional boundaries with vulnerable patient
A Band 5 community nurse with six years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after inappropriate contact with a vulnerable patient, the tribunal ruled.
30-year employee dismissed for gross misconduct without any disciplinary procedure: unfair dismissal
A tribunal found that Dunwood Specialties Limited unfairly dismissed a long-serving employee after failing to follow any disciplinary process, but reduced compensation by 80% because the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway.
Copying council CCTV footage and lying about it: dismissal for gross misconduct upheld
A Neighbourhood Services Assistant was fairly dismissed after copying council-owned CCTV footage without permission and dishonestly denying it when questioned. The tribunal upheld the dismissal.
Dismissed for database searches: menopause symptoms not a disability, tribunal rules
An administrative officer with 18 years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after searching her own and her neighbour's addresses on a DWP database. The tribunal upheld the dismissal and found her menopausal symptoms did not amount to a disability.