Charge Detail Summary

File Number: Nur22/553P
Practitioner: Deena Rose Iosefo (Trigg)
Hearing Start Date:

Hearing End Date:

Hearing Town/City:
Hearing Location:
Charge Characteristics:

Acknowledgement of colleagues - inadequate/inappropriate (Established)

Behaviour inappropriate

Additional Orders:

Name Suppression to Complainant and/or Patient and/or client

Interim non-publication order for the suppression of the complainants named in the charge.

Permanent non-publication order for the suppression of the complainants named in the charge.

1370_Nur 22_553P.pdf1367Nur22553P.pdf

Name Suppression to Complainant and/or Patient and/or client

Permanent non-publication order of the names of those persons named in social media posts

1390Nur22553P Addendum to Penalty Decision.pdf

Appeal Order:


Substantive Decision 1350_Nur23_598P.pdf

Penalty Decision

Penalty Decision

Addendum to penalty decision
1390Nur22553P Addendum to Penalty Decision.pdf

Appeal Decision:

Precis of Decision:

A panel of the Health Practitioner’s Disciplinary Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) convened 14 December 2022 and 3 May 2023 by audio visual link to hear a charge laid by a Professional Conduct Committee (“the PCC”) appointed by the Nursing Council of New Zealand (“the Council”) against Ms Deena Rose Trigg (Iosefo) registered nurse of Whangarei (“the Nurse”).



The charge alleged that in August 2020, the Nurse posted offensive and/or inappropriate comments which were derogatory to nurses on her personal Facebook page and were widely disseminated.

A full copy of the Charge and its Particulars is found in the full Liability Decision.



The Nurse obtained registration in 2000. She was employed by the Northern District Health Board in 2001 and worked in both New Zealand and England for over 20 years. The Nurse’s most recent practising certificate expired on 31 December 2020. She was not working as a nurse at the time of the events the subject of the charge.


The Charge relates to a number of Facebook comments which the Nurse posted on her personal Facebook account. The Facebook posts named several specific nurses with whom she had previously worked with, along with their place of work. The Nurse alleged that her colleagues were bullies and had treated both her and a range of other nurses very poorly, in many cases causing them to retire or seek alternative employment.


A number of those named in these posts filed police complaints. In response to police involvement, the Nurse apologised and immediately took the posts down. During this process, the Council was also contacted, leading to an enquiry.



The Tribunal found the Charge and each of its particulars established, amounting to professional misconduct warranting disciplinary sanction.

The PCC acknowledged that bullying is a serious issue within the nursing profession, however the Nurse’s experiences of bullying were not at issue in the proceeding.


The Tribunal was of the firm view that where bullying occurs it should be called out and dealt with appropriately by the relevant authority. The Tribunal did not consider that social media was the forum to prove the truth of the allegations.  The nurses named were unable to respond to the allegations. The comments were inappropriate. The naming, shaming and threatening fellow nurses to a wide audience, is offensive, inappropriate, and derogatory to the named nurses individually and the profession as a whole. The Tribunal acknowledged that the Nurse’s right to freedom of expression was engaged but considered that it was subject to the conduct expected of a health practitioner.



The Tribunal ordered:

  • Censure
  • Conditions
  • 5% contribution of costs to both the PCC and the Tribunal.

The Tribunal directed publication of the decision and a summary.