Key Points
- Stella Roberts, a senior midwife at St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, has been struck off the Nursing and Midwifery Council register.
- The misconduct panel found she bullied and humiliated colleagues while head of midwifery.
- The panel said she created a bullying and toxic environment in a senior role.
- It also found the behaviour created risks to patient safety.
- The report said she acted dishonestly when securing employment elsewhere.
- Ms Roberts did not attend the hearings in October 2025 and April 2026.
- She has not worked at St George’s since 2019.
South London (South London News) May 21, 2026, a senior midwife has been struck off after a Nursing and Midwifery Council panel found she bullied colleagues, created a toxic work environment and acted dishonestly in relation to later employment. The panel concluded that Stella Roberts’ fitness to practise as a midwife was impaired after hearings held in October 2025 and April 2026, and she was removed from the register following the findings.
What did the panel find?
As reported by the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s fitness to practise committee, the panel found that Ms Roberts, while in a senior position, hadcommitted an error
“created a bullying and toxic environment for colleagues”
and that this had “caused risks to patient safety”. The panel also said she had,
“acted dishonestly in securing employment elsewhere”,
according to the published reasons.
The report said the misconduct was serious enough to justify striking her off the register. Ms Roberts did not attend either hearing, which were held months apart before the final decision was published in April 2026.
What happened at St George’s?
The case concerns Ms Roberts’ time as head of midwifery at St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. According to the published account, she has not worked there since 2019.
The findings relate to the way she treated colleagues while holding a senior management role. The panel’s wording indicates the behaviour was not treated as an isolated workplace disagreement, but as sustained conduct serious enough to affect professional standards and potentially patient safety.
Why does patient safety matter here?
The panel linked the bullying culture it identified to patient safety risks. It said that creating a hostile or toxic working environment can affect how staff communicate, work together and raise concerns, which is why the misconduct was considered so serious.
That concern is consistent with wider professional and research evidence showing that bullying and unprofessional behaviour in healthcare can harm team functioning and patient care.
The issue is not only about workplace conduct but also about whether staff can work safely and openly around one another.
How was dishonesty involved?
The committee also found that Ms Roberts acted dishonestly when securing employment elsewhere. The published reasons do not, in the material available here, set out the full mechanics of that dishonesty, but the panel treated it as part of the overall misconduct picture.
In regulatory cases, dishonesty is especially significant because it raises questions not just about conduct at one workplace, but about trust in future professional settings. That made the outcome more severe than a simple warning or suspension would likely have been.
What did the hearings cover?
The misconduct was considered across hearings in October 2025 and April 2026, according to the panel’s published reasons. Ms Roberts did not attend either session, and the committee proceeded in her absence.
The final report recorded that her fitness to practise was impaired, which is the regulatory finding that allows the NMC to impose a sanction, including striking off in serious cases. That is the step the panel took here.
What is the wider context?
Bullying in healthcare settings has long been linked to poorer staff wellbeing and weaker communication, both of which can affect patient outcomes.
Research and professional guidance have noted that bullying can undermine confidence, increase stress and damage safety culture.
The case also sits within a wider regulatory framework in which the NMC is expected to protect the public by acting where a registrant’s behaviour falls below acceptable standards.
In this case, the panel concluded that the combination of bullying, toxic leadership and dishonesty justified removal from practice.
Explore More Local South London News
TiggColl family club house retrofit plan for Richmond 2026
Greens Take Lewisham, Overtake Labour in Lambeth, London 2026
Background of the development
St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust is a major South London NHS trust, and Ms Roberts’ case emerged from conduct said to have taken place while she was head of midwifery there.
She left the trust in 2019, but the disciplinary process continued through the professional regulator, which later considered whether her conduct amounted to impaired fitness to practise.
The Nursing and Midwifery Council publishes fitness to practise outcomes where it finds that a nurse or midwife has fallen short of professional standards.
In this case, the published reasons show the panel concluded the behaviour was serious, sustained and incompatible with continued registration.
Prediction
For NHS staff and midwives, this case is likely to reinforce the importance of reporting bullying, maintaining proper professional boundaries and ensuring senior staff are held to the same standards as everyone else. It may also encourage trusts to scrutinise leadership culture more closely, because the findings link workplace behaviour with patient safety risk.
For patients and the wider public, the practical effect is that regulators and employers may be seen as more willing to act where there is evidence of toxic leadership or dishonesty. That could increase confidence in professional oversight, although the real test will be whether healthcare organisations prevent similar problems before they reach a regulatory hearing.
