Page Section: Centre Content Column
Inappropriate relationship with client following discharge from care (05HDC16909)
Download Inappropriate relationship with client following discharge from care (05HDC16909) (PDF 8Kb)
(05HDC16909, 22 November 2006)
Clinical psychologist ~
Professional boundaries ~ Personal relationship ~ Coercion ~
Exploitation ~ New Zealand College of Clinical Psychologists' Code
of Ethics ~ Rights 2, 4(2)
A man was admitted to a psychiatric
unit with an acute episode of mania, requiring intensive treatment
for almost two months as an inpatient, and a further two months as
an outpatient, before discharge from the service. The man's
clinical psychologist developed an attraction to him and,
appropriately, discussed this at clinical supervision. There is no
evidence that she acted inappropriately during this stage.
Following the man's discharge, and
move to another city, the clinical psychologist telephoned him, and
then called him regularly. Due to personal and work reasons, the
psychologist moved to live and work in the same city. She and the
man moved into the same boarding house. It appears that their
friendship grew, and an intimate relationship commenced.
It was held that the clinical
psychologist acted unethically by pursuing a relationship with a
vulnerable ex-client a week after his discharge from her care. All
her actions were contrary to the Psychologists Board's Code of
Ethics. By failing to maintain professional boundaries with an
ex-client and by exploiting the trust that had been established in
the clinical context, she failed to comply with professional and
ethical standards, and therefore breached Rights 2 and Right
4(2).
The clinical psychologist's employer was not held vicariously
liable for her breaches of the Code, as there were appropriate
guidelines in place on health providers maintaining professional
boundaries with patients, and the clinical psychologist was
provided with appropriate clinical supervision during the period
she treated the man.
The matter was referred to the Director of Proceedings, who laid a
disciplinary charge before the Health Practitioners Disciplinary
Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld a charge of professional
misconduct.
The psychologist's registration was
cancelled. Prior to a re-application for registration, a
psychological examination is to be undertaken; evidence is to be
given that the psychologist has disclosed to all employers at the
time of her employment in any role where she is providing
counselling and related professional services of the fact of the
proceedings and their outcome; and she is to provide satisfactory
evidence to the Psychologists Board at the time of the application
that her personal circumstances are stable.
The psychologist was fined $5,000
and ordered to pay $5,000 costs. Name suppression was granted
because publication of the name would lead to identification of the
consumer.
Link to Health Practitioners
Disciplinary Tribunal decision:
http://www.hpdt.org.nz/portals/0/psy0758dfindings.pdf