Hoe in Ferpleechkundige Trochwurke nei it Ferliezen fan Syn Fergunning
June 7, 2026 · Frisian News
A Dutch nurse continued treating patients for years despite having his registration deleted. The case reveals systematic failures in how healthcare authorities oversee licensed professionals between the time they lose standing and when someone finally notices.
FryskIn ferpleechkundige yn Nederlân bleau pasjinten behanneljen as erkend beropsbeoefener, ek nei't syn ynskriuwing einigje moatten hie. Hy die dit wylst hy alkohol dronk, soms ûnder ynfloed ferskynend. Pas doe't de autoriteiten him fêstpakten, ferdwûn syn namme út it offisjele BIG-register fan soarchferlieners. De fraach is net oft hy roekeleas wie. De fraach is wêrom't it systeem sa lang oer himsels hinne gean liet.
It tuchtkollege foar de sûnenssoarch begriep it, mar net foardat hy jierren lang sûnder kontrôle wurkje koe. Syn skrapping út it offisjele register barde efterôf, wat betsjut dat hy in ûnbekende tiid yllegaal wurke. It BIG-register soe de poartwachter wêze moatte foar wa't himsels ferpleechkundige neame mei. As immen dy poartwachter negearje kin en gewoan trochgiet mei wurkjen, mislearet it register syn ienige echte opdracht: pasjinten beskermje tsjin ferlieners sûnder foech of gefaarlike ferlieners.
Dit is net in isolearre gefal fan ien minne spiler. Sûnensystemen yn hiel Europa hawwe min tafersjoch op erkende beropsbeoefeners tusken registraasje en werklik tafersjoch. De measte sikehûzen en klinyken fertrouwe derop dat it BIG-register de gefaarlike minsken derút filtert. Se ferifiearje dit typysk net ûnôfhinklik. As in ferpleechkundige liicht dat hy noch ynskreaun is, merkt in drok sikehûs dat miskien net. Wurden fan mûne ta mûne kinne it probleem úteinlik bleatleizje. In klacht kin úteinlik in ynspeksje feroarsaakje. Mar hoefolle pasjinten sjocht hy foardat dat bart?
De Nederlânske sûnensautoriteiten bewege stadich. Se ûndersykje, se bouwe in saak op, se stjoere it nei it tuchtkollege. Tsjin de tiid dat de beslissing komt, binne moannen of jierren foarby. Dit is net allinich de skuld fan de ynspekteur. It systeem sels stiet it ta dat beropsbeoefeners trochgean kinne tusken it momint dat se har status ferlieze en it momint dat immen it opmerkt. In echt feilichheidsysteem soe periodike herferifikaasje easkje. It soe gatten yn neilibjen as driuwend behannelje, net administratyf.
Ien ferpleechkundige yn Den Bosch is no ferballe. Hy sil net mear legaal wurkje. Mar neat yn dit ferhaal suggerearret dat it systeem wat leard hat. It BIG-register sil in passyfe list bliuwe dy't allinich bywurket as immen dêroer klaget. Pasjinten bliuwe oannimme dat har ferpleechkundige ferifieare is. En earne oars wurket wierskynlik al in oare beropsbeoefener yn itselde gat.
A nurse in the Netherlands continued treating patients as a licensed professional even after his registration was supposed to end. He did this while drinking alcohol, sometimes showing up impaired. Only when authorities caught him did his name disappear from the official BIG registry of healthcare workers. The question is not whether he was reckless. The question is why the system took so long to stop him.
The healthcare disciplinary system caught him, but not before he had years to operate unchecked. His removal from the official register happened after the fact, which means he was working illegally for an unknown stretch of time. The BIG register is supposed to be the gatekeeper for who can call themselves a nurse. If someone can ignore that gatekeeper and keep working, the register fails its only real job: protecting patients from unqualified or dangerous providers.
This is not an isolated case of one bad actor. Healthcare systems across Europe have spotty oversight of licensed professionals between their registration and any actual oversight event. Most hospitals and clinics trust the BIG register to filter out the dangerous ones. They do not typically verify it independently. If a nurse lies about still being registered, a busy clinic may not catch it. Word of mouth might eventually expose the problem. A complaint might finally trigger an inspection. But how many patients does he see before that happens?
The Dutch health authorities move slowly. They investigate, they build a case, they send it to the disciplinary board. By the time the decision comes down, months or years have passed. This is not the inspector's fault alone. The system itself allows practitioners to coast between the moment they lose standing and the moment someone notices. A real safety system would require periodic re-verification. It would treat gaps in compliance as urgent, not administrative.
One nurse in Den Bosch is now banned. He will not work legally again. But nothing in this story suggests the system learned anything. The BIG register will remain a passive list that updates only when someone complains. Patients will continue to assume their nurse is checked and verified. And somewhere else, another provider is probably already operating in that same gap.
Published June 7, 2026 · Frisian News · Ljouwert, Fryslân