Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jun;26(4):1039-1049.
doi: 10.1177/0969733017731917. Epub 2017 Nov 14.

Clinical governance breakdown: Australian cases of wilful blindness and whistleblowing

Affiliations

Clinical governance breakdown: Australian cases of wilful blindness and whistleblowing

Sonja Cleary et al. Nurs Ethics. 2019 Jun.

Abstract

Background: After their attempts to have patient safety concerns addressed internally were ignored by wilfully blind managers, nurses from Bundaberg Base Hospital and Macarthur Health Service felt compelled to 'blow the whistle'. Wilful blindness is the human desire to prefer ignorance to knowledge; the responsibility to be informed is shirked.

Objective: To provide an account of instances of wilful blindness identified in two high-profile cases of nurse whistleblowing in Australia.

Research design: Critical case study methodology using Fay's Critical Social Theory to examine, analyse and interpret existing data generated by the Commissions of Inquiry held into Bundaberg Base Hospital and Macarthur Health Service patient safety breaches. All data was publicly available and assessed according to the requirements of unobtrusive research methods and secondary data analysis.

Ethical considerations: Data collection for the case studies relied entirely on publicly available documentary sources recounting and detailing past events.

Findings: Data from both cases reveal managers demonstrating wilful blindness towards patient safety concerns. Concerns were unaddressed; nurses, instead, experienced retaliatory responses leading to a 'social crisis' in the organisation and to whistleblowing.

Conclusion: Managers tasked with clinical governance must be aware of mechanisms with the potential to blind them. The human tendency to favour positive news and avoid conflict is powerful. Understanding wilful blindness can assist managers' awareness of the competing emotions occurring in response to ethical challenges, such as whistleblowing.

Keywords: Nurses; nursing; reporting; whistleblowing; wilful blindness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

    1. McDonald S, Ahern K. Physical and emotional effects of whistleblowing. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv 2002; 40: 14–27. - PubMed
    1. King G, Scudder JN. Reasons registered nurses report serious wrongdoings in a public teaching hospital. Psychol Rep 2013; 112: 626–636. - PubMed
    1. Johnstone MJ. Patient safety, ethics and whistleblowing: a nursing response to the events at the Campbelltown and Camden Hospitals. Aust Health Rev 2004; 28: 13–19. - PubMed
    1. Peters K, Luck L, Hutchinson M, et al. The emotional sequelae of whistleblowing: findings from a qualitative study. J Clin Nurs 2011; 20: 2907–2914. - PubMed
    1. Braithwaite J, Travaglia JF. An overview of clinical governance policies, practices and initiatives. Aust Health Rev 2008; 32: 10–22. - PubMed