LPN License Rejected Due to Failure to Disclose Criminal Arrest

[Nurse Beth, MSN]

7 minutes ago, TheScarecrow said:

I just came here to say, not a lawyer but I'm going to share this anyway: [Properly] expunged records should never show up on an FBI background check because expunged records technically no longer exist. And if a mistake is made during the expungement process - which can happen and you have no control over it - hopefully you kept your "receipt" because it's the only proof that you're going to find that you ever expunged it in the first place (what record? ?). To summarize, you are under no legal obligation whatsoever to disclose expunged records to any licensing agency.

I would hate for someone to take what you just said as fact. It could put their career at risk. Every nurse should check with their own state BON/BRN.

From CA:

" Pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4, you are required to report a conviction that was expunged. The law specifies that it does not relieve you from the obligation to disclose the conviction in response to any direct questions contained in any questionnaire or application for public office, for licensure by any state or local agency."

[Nurse Beth, MSN]

9 hours ago, KalipsoRed21 said:

Yay, tax payer monies wasted on over regulation all in the supposed name of protecting the public. Such BS! Do we want safe accountable nurses? Yes. Other than criminal charges for assault, murder, or rape....any charge greater than 7-10 years old shouldn’t impede a nurse from his/her license. But that is just my cynical opinion about a licensing board that is suppose to protect the public from us but doesn’t support or enforce things like safe staffing models or make the line clear where it is appropriate for one to be insubordinate to protect the patient...you know, things that actually save the lives of the public. Just an excuse to propagate support for more dictator wanna bes. Sorry, if you can’t tell I don’t think any BON is regulating our field appropriately, just enjoy abusing the power they have.

Somehow as nurses we think that our state's Board of Nursing or Board of Registered Nursing stands for us, and advocates for us. They don't, and when it comes down to it, they are not our friend. They exist to protect the public.

Professional organizations such as the ANA should strongly lobby for our interests and set position statements, like the AMA does. Unfortunately the ANA doesn't always meet expectations.

At the very least, join your specialty professional nursing organization. Currently I belong to the Association of Nursing Professional Development (ANPD), Infusion Nurses Society (INS), Academy of MedSurg Nurses (AMSN), and ANA. I get invaluable information from each.

Members of AMSN, for example, have a chat board and they talk about up-to-date topics, much like here on allnurses. It's affirming somehow to see that other hospitals/nurses have the same struggles and share information.

Apologize for the topic drift ?

[KalipsoRed21, BSN, RN]

On 8/13/2020 at 8:49 AM, Nurse Beth said:

Somehow as nurses we think that our state's Board of Nursing or Board of Registered Nursing stands for us, and advocates for us. They don't, and when it comes down to it, they are not our friend. They exist to protect the public.

Professional organizations such as the ANA should strongly lobby for our interests and set position statements, like the AMA does. Unfortunately the ANA doesn't always meet expectations.

At the very least, join your specialty professional nursing organization. Currently I belong to the Association of Nursing Professional Development (ANPD), Infusion Nurses Society (INS), Academy of MedSurg Nurses (AMSN), and ANA. I get invaluable information from each.

Members of AMSN, for example, have a chat board and they talk about up-to-date topics, much like here on allnurses. It's affirming somehow to see that other hospitals/nurses have the same struggles and share information.

Apologize for the topic drift ?

Nope, I don’t want the Board to be my buddy. I want them to hold us accountable....to protect the public. But agreeing that nurses who have an overwhelming work load can’t practice safely isn’t “being on our side” that is protecting the public. Ensuring that reasonable process and standards for the profession are kept by nurses protects the public.Revoking licenses based on EXTREMELY old small crimes greater than 10 years is a more stringent standard than even the Police have to maintain. Micromanaging and excessive punishment doesn’t protect the public, it does quite the opposite. It allows a governing body to unjustly reduce the workforce on abstract grounds and their own self righteous standards. And it also allows a body to unjustly reduce citizens rights based on the Board’s determination of what is/is not good for the public without any evidence base. I don’t need the Board to be my friend, I need them to have reasonable standards that don’t impede on my rights as a citizen.

[Sour Lemon]

2 hours ago, Allgood2016 said:

First off; I am 64 years old. I was already licensed as an LVN. Second; I had taken care of everything in Texas. Third; I was in my mid 50s when everything showed up.

As I said I had all of the paper work; and, was able to prove that I had done what was needed, per the court.

So, if you don't believe; or do; isn't important. What is; to me; is that I was an LPN/LVN for over 40 years; and, I loved every minute of it.

The person you responded to appears to have been responding to the original post, not yours.

[Geosurfsup]

The Illinois Dept. of Financial & Professional Regulation posts this message on its website,  www.idfpr.com  and  I've deleted many choices from the drop down lists.

JB Pritzker, Governor

Deborah Hagan, Secretary of the Division of Professional Regulation

Welcome to ILDPR.  The mission . . .  by ensuring that licensure qualifications and standards for professional practice are properly evaluated . . .

---

Notice Regarding Sealed or Expunged Records

Individuals applying for a license, certification or registration under an Act administered by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation Click here for more information.

For Further information regarding the IDFPR's Division of Professional Regulation please click here.

Individuals applying for a license, certification or registration under an Act administered by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation are not obligated to disclose sealed or expunged records of a conviction or arrest. Posted in compliance with PA 100-0286   January 2, 2018.

The Dept is required to uphold the Safer Foundation Principles.

https://saferfoundation.org/Safer-Policy-Institute/Policy-Center/Barriers-to-Employment-and-Reentry

[marples]

TheScarecrow said:

Dismissed charges and any arrests WILL be revealed, but OP never said anything about expungement/expunction. He simply said his charges were dismissed, which has nothing to do with record expungement.

TheScarecrow said:

I just came here to say, not a lawyer but I'm going to share this anyway: [Properly] expunged records should never show up on an FBI background check because expunged records technically no longer exist. And if a mistake is made during the expungement process - which can happen and you have no control over it - hopefully you kept your "receipt" because it's the only proof that you're going to find that you ever expunged it in the first place (what record? ?). To summarize, you are under no legal obligation whatsoever to disclose expunged records to any licensing agency.

Whoa not true, please do not spread this false information it could be harmful.  I have my FBI fingerprint report from before AND after my expungements and all of the convictions are still on the report.  The only difference is the disposition for the convictions has now changed, indicating the conviction was expunged.  Having an expungement does NOT remove the conviction from the FBI report.  Expungement allows you to legally check the "no" box for criminal convictions with private employers.  It will also allow you to pass a private company background check (all three I have had done for school/jobs come back clear now).  The California BRN does require you to disclose an expungement because at one time it was in fact a conviction.  While it is in your best interest to keep the certified/stamped copy of your expungement document, this however is not the only copy.  Last week I went to the courthouse to make copies of minute orders, and each case file at the courthouse in fact had a certified/stamped copy of the expungement as well.  Expungements are wonderful and useful in the private sector, however the government, military, and state licensing agencies will ALWAYS be able to see your record, expunged or not. 

[beachynurse, ASN, BSN]

marples said:

Whoa not true, please do not spread this false information it could be harmful.  I have my FBI fingerprint report from before AND after my expungements and all of the convictions are still on the report.  The only difference is the disposition for the convictions has now changed, indicating the conviction was expunged.  Having an expungement does NOT remove the conviction from the FBI report.  Expungement allows you to legally check the "no" box for criminal convictions with private employers.  It will also allow you to pass a private company background check (all three I have had done for school/jobs come back clear now).  The California BRN does require you to disclose an expungement because at one time it was in fact a conviction.  While it is in your best interest to keep the certified/stamped copy of your expungement document, this however is not the only copy.  Last week I went to the courthouse to make copies of minute orders, and each case file at the courthouse in fact had a certified/stamped copy of the expungement as well.  Expungements are wonderful and useful in the private sector, however the government, military, and state licensing agencies will ALWAYS be able to see your record, expunged or not. 

Just curious, what if it's not a conviction? The charges were dropped because the complainant lied to protect himself from being charged with a felony, and the person who was charged improperly was able to get the charges/arrest expunged?