Sask. Nurses College Clears Nurse of Spreading COVID Misinformation

A nurse prepares a COVID-19 vaccine in Toronto on March 23, 2021. Cole Burston/Getty Images

The College of Registered Nurses of Saskatchewan (CRNS) has cleared nurse Leah McInnes of charges of spreading misinformation through her opposition to vaccine mandates.

The CRNS Discipline Committee’s decision, published on Jan. 12, dismissed all charges against Ms. McInnes, concluding that the case should not have proceeded to a hearing, according to a Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) Jan. 19 release.

Ms. McInnes, a registered nurse since 2013 and mother of two, was charged by the CRNS’s Investigation Committee for her social media advocacy against vaccine mandates.

“If your boss tells you that you must submit to them and be penetrated in a number of ways in their authoritative way,,[sic] coerced through threat, manipulation, ultimatum, shaming etc, what do we normally call this?” states one of Ms. McInnes’s posts detailed by the committee in its decision.

The committee accused her of using the term “vaccine mandate” in a manner that constituted misinformation. However, her use of the term was found to align with its general understanding in public discourse.

Starting Oct. 1, 2021, the Saskatchewan Health Authority (SHA) implemented a policy mandating all existing SHA staff members to submit evidence of complete COVID-19 vaccination.

Ms. McInnes’s stance centred on medical ethics and the right to informed consent, citing emerging scientific evidence that COVID vaccines do not prevent virus transmission. Her opposition to vaccine mandates as a violation of ethical principles gained public attention, particularly when the Saskatchewan government initially indicated no intention to enforce such mandates due to privacy and personal rights concerns.

However, institutions such as the Canadian Medical Association Journal advocated for mandatory vaccination as early as February 2021.

“Provincial governments should put in place rules for mandatory vaccination of health care workers that cut across all public and private settings, and should not leave this to the discretion of individual employers,” they wrote.

The case against Ms. McInnes drew criticism for its potential impact on professional freedom of speech. Her legal team, including co-counsel Andre Memauri and Glenn Blackett, argued that the charges undermined a health professional’s right to participate in democratic discourse and ethical dissent. They emphasized the importance of professionals expressing their sincere beliefs for the integrity of science, ethics, and democracy.

Ms. McInnes’s defence was further bolstered by expert testimony, including that of former Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario Dr. Richard Schabas, who confirmed the non-specific medical nature of the term “vaccine mandate.” Additionally, evidence presented during the hearings corroborated Ms. McInnes’s statements about the vaccines not providing sterilizing immunity.

In a statement following the verdict, Ms. McInnes expressed gratitude for the CRNS Discipline Committee’s recognition of her rights.

“I very much value the right of my colleagues to express opinions different than mine and support them in their endeavours to seek change in healthcare and government policy they perceive to be in the public interest,” she said in a statement.

The Epoch Times contacted the JCCF for further information but it did not respond before press time.