Katie Louise Windle
Introduction
Katie Louise Windle is a former UK registered midwife who worked in the triage department at Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. In May 2026, a Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) fitness-to-practise panel found that, across a period of roughly two years, she had failed five patients in her care, concluded that her fitness to practise was impaired, and struck her off the register, an outcome in which the regulator directs removal from the register.
Background Information
Windle was registered with the NMC under PIN 18A0198E and practised as a Band 6 midwife in the triage department at Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. The allegations were considered at a substantive hearing of the NMC’s Fitness to Practise Committee and concerned her conduct toward five patients, referred to throughout the determination as Patients A to E, between November 2020 and October 2022. The hearing started on 1 May 2026 and ended on 7 May 2026, with the decision issued on 7 May 2026.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated vs. alleged. The findings in this section come from a Nursing and Midwifery Council fitness-to-practise panel determination, which decided the charges on the balance of probabilities. Charges found proved are court-of-record-equivalent regulatory findings; Katie Louise Windle was found NOT proved on charges 1a, 3, 7a and 10. Panels do not convict; nothing here is a criminal conviction unless the determination itself records one.
The panel found 22 charges proved concerning the five patients. Regarding Patient A, it found that Windle failed to conduct an adequate examination to determine their stage of labour and incorrectly determined they were in the latent phase of labour, and that she failed to advocate for Patient A’s birth wishes to have a pool birth and a physiological third stage. In plain-English terms used on the determination record, she “did not respect patients’ dignity or birth wishes” across the episodes examined. She was found to have incorrectly advised Patient B not to attend hospital, and to have advised Patient E not to attend hospital in the same mistaken way. She was found to have been rude to Patient B and/or their partner, and rude to Patient C and/or their partner. In Patient B’s care, the panel found she failed to cover up their exposed lower body, made them walk in a public area with their trousers around their ankles, failed to offer a change of clothing, and failed to provide pain relief at the appropriate time. It also found she inserted her hand into Patient B’s vagina and roughly removed the placenta. For Patient D, she failed to perform an Amnisure vaginal test and instead asked the patient to perform their own test.
The panel determined that Windle’s actions fell seriously short of the standards expected of a registered midwife and amounted to misconduct, breaching the Code’s requirements including treating people with kindness, respect and compassion and upholding their dignity. Aggravating factors it identified included conduct devoid of any meaningful reflection or significant insight on the impact of her unprofessional conduct on patients in her care; abuse of a position of trust; conduct which deliberately or recklessly put people receiving care at risk of suffering harm and caused actual harm; a pattern of misconduct over a period of time; the vulnerability of persons receiving care; and a failure to work collaboratively with colleagues.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The panel found Windle’s fitness to practise currently impaired on both public protection and public interest grounds. It identified a repeated pattern of poor behaviour indicating deep-seated attitudinal issues, limited insight, and no evidence of remediation, and made a striking-off order removing her from the NMC register — the outcome described on the determination record as erasure, or being struck off the register. Because erasure decisions carry appeal provisions, the panel also imposed an 18-month interim suspension order to cover the appeal period. The determination page notes that “the regulator directed removal from the register in this decision” and points readers to the official register for the practitioner’s current registration status.
Current Status
Windle’s registered status is erased. MedicWatch’s practitioner page, last verified against the NMC register on 10 July 2026, records her as erased from the register at last register check, with the erasure decided 7 May 2026 by the Nursing and Midwifery Council as her most recent outcome. The practitioner page lists the substantive hearing as the decision behind that outcome and carries a caution that anyone checking her status should rely on the official NMC register rather than any secondary record. The determination itself was added to the MedicWatch record on 9 July 2026.
Impact on Their Career/Life
The striking-off order removed Windle from the NMC register, meaning the regulator directed removal of her registration and she can no longer practise as a registered midwife. The panel’s reasoning rested on both public protection and the wider public interest: it identified a repeated pattern of poor behaviour indicating deep-seated attitudinal issues, limited insight, and no evidence of remediation. The 18-month interim suspension order applies while the appeal period runs.