ALJDEC - Licensing
26A-2025050028-NUR · State Board of Nursing · 2025-12-15
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
IN THE MATTER OF REGISTERED NURSE LICENSE NO. RN292940 AND ADVANCED PRACTICE CERTIFICATE RNP292940 ISSUED TO:
KAMIKA CECILE MCLAUGHLIN
AKA: KAMIKA CECILE JEAN MCLAUGHLIN, KAMIKA MCLAUGHLIN,
RESPONDENT.
No. 26A-[number redacted]-NUR
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: November 6, 2025. Record open until November 25, 2025.
APPEARANCES: Assistant Attorney General Roberto Pulver appeared for the Arizona Board of Nursing. Respondent did not appear.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Department Exhibits 1 through 9.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Arizona State Board of Nursing (“Board”) has the authority to regulate and control the practice of nursing in the State of Arizona, pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) §§ 32-1606, 32-1663, 32-1664, 41-1092.11(B). The Board also has the authority to impose disciplinary sanctions against the holders of nursing licenses for violations of the Nurse Practice Act, A.R.S. §§ 32-1601 et seq. and Arizona Administrative Code (“A.A.C.”) Rules 4-19-101 et seq.
Kamika McLaughlin (“Respondent”) held Board issued Registered Nurse License RN292940 and Advanced Practice Certificate RNP292940 in the State of Arizona.
The facts as stated in the Complaint and Notice of Hearing were uncontested and supported by the evidence presented by the Board. Accordingly, the Tribunal adopts the Board’s facts in full:
1. On May 1, 2025 the Board received communication on the online complaint form from Respondent stating that she was human trafficked, and that she wanted Google, Ukraine, Facebook, Apple, Mexico, and Southwest Airlines investigated. Due to the seriousness of the information Respondent submitted via the online complaint form, concerns were raised about Respondent’s health and safety and her ability to practice nursing. Due to these concerns, the Board opened an investigation. . . .
2. Further investigation by Board staff disclosed that on her social media profile, Respondent operates her own practice and conducts telehealth mental health visits. She continues to hold an active RN license and an active APRN certificate, authorizing her to prescribe medications and treat patients in Arizona. As such, the Board has no assurance of her safety to practice or of public protection.
3. On May 1, 2025, Board Staff conducted a telephonic interview with Respondent. She expressed surprise that the Board is not investigating Google, Southwest Airlines, or Ukraine, and that she is instead the subject of the investigation. Respondent stated she had also sent the same information to the Nevada and Pennsylvania Boards of Nursing, hoping one of the agencies could help her escape the “people” she says are trafficking her. When asked to explain “trafficking,” she said she is hired for jobs and then either her patient load is immediately reduced or the job is eliminated. She added that she obtained an Arizona license only because an Arizona employer hired her; however, after she relocated, the position was withdrawn at the last minute. Respondent stated “That is trafficking”. Respondent stated she would like to come to Arizona and work, but is afraid of being trafficked again.
4. Respondent stated that Southwest Airlines aircraft fly over her apartment and drop white powder, which she says worsens her allergies and makes her very tired. She believes Southwest is working with the DEA to make her sick.
5. Respondent stated she moved to Nevada from Pennsylvania; her husband and his girlfriend remain in Pennsylvania with her children. She further claimed she believes her husband has been kidnapped.
6. Board Staff explained that she must complete and return the Investigative Questionnaire and that the Board would like her to undergo a comprehensive psychological evaluation by a Board-approved evaluator. When asked about current providers or medical records, she stated she had a prior inpatient hospitalization but did not wish to discuss its nature or provide further details. Respondent ended the call.
7. On September 25, 2025, based upon the facts and circumstances set forth above, the Board found that the public health safety and welfare imperatively required Emergency action. Consequently, the Board ordered, pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.11(B), and effective immediately, that Kamika Cecile McLaughlin (“Respondent”), the holder of registered nurse license no. RN292940 and advanced practice certificate RNP292940 is SUMMARILY SUSPENDED pending proceedings for revocation and other action by the Board.
Dr. Janet Olson, program administrator for compliance with the Board, testified in support of the facts presented. She testified that Respondent did not cooperate with the Board’s investigation or comply with it inquiries. She testified that summary suspension was appropriate because Respondent had the ability to open a practice in Arizona at any time, and she was not safe to practice medicine in Arizona. She testified that the documents were provided to Respondent by email and mail.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Respondent was deemed to have received the Notice of Hearing by methods reasonably calculated to effect notice.
This matter lies within the Board’s jurisdiction pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1606(B)(10).
The Board bears the burden of proof and must establish cause to penalize Respondent’s practical nurse license by a preponderance of the evidence. “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” A preponderance of the evidence is “evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is, evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.”
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1601, unprofessional conduct includes:
(d) Any conduct or practice that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of a patient or the public.
(e) Being mentally incompetent or physically unsafe to a degree that is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of a patient or the public. . . .
(j) Violating this chapter or a rule that is adopted by the board pursuant to this chapter.
Pursuant to A.A.C. R4-19-403, unprofessional conduct includes:
25. Failing to: a. Furnish in writing a full and complete explanation of a matter reported pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1664, or b. Respond to a subpoena issued by the Board;
31. Practicing in any other manner that gives the Board reasonable cause to believe the health of a patient or the public may be harmed.
The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1601(27)(d).
The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1601(27)(e).
The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1601(27)(j).
The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct pursuant to A.A.C. R4-19-403(25).
The Board established by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent engaged in unprofessional conduct pursuant to A.A.C. R4-19-403(31).
In light of the evidence of record and the risk of harm to which patients and the public were and could be exposed as a result of Respondent’s actions and violations of the Nurse Practice Act, the Board established cause to impose a disciplinary sanction against Respondent’s license under A.R.S. § 32-1606(B)(10) and A.R.S. § 32-1663(D).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Board uphold its summary suspension of Registered Nurse License No. RN292940 and Advanced Practice Certificate No. RNP292940.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Board revoke Registered Nurse License No. RN292940 and Advanced Practice Certificate No. RNP292940.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be forty (40) days from the date of that certification.
Done this day, December 15, 2025.
/s/ Samuel Fox
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Joey Ridenour, RN, MN, Executive Director
State Board of Nursing
Kamika Cecile Mclaughlin
[email redacted]
Roberto Pulver
Office of the Attorney General
Licensing & Enforcement Section
[email redacted]
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff