false claims against psychotherapist - wins 'justice' and £80k in settlement

Sacked psychotherapist wins 'justice' and £80k in settlement




January 4, 2011


http://www.psychminded.co.uk/news/news2011/Psychotherapist-wins-%27justice%27-and-%A380k-after-sacking-settlement001.htm
......



A child psychotherapist has won "justice" and an £80,000 settlement after being sacked over allegations she abused a client.



Judy Williams was was sacked from Manchester Children’s Hospital on allegations in December 2008 that she unnecessarily gave a female client medicine, inappropriately restrained her and used inappropriate language to colleagues.



But, after investigating the claims, the Association of Child Psychotherapists decided she had no case to answer.



The Health Professions Council threw out a similar case against Ms Williams last June.



Now, on the eve of an employment tribunal, the trust has apologised, and paid £50,000 compensation to Ms Williams, and £30,000 back pay.



Ms Williams told her local paper: “I was determined to achieve justice but there is nothing in this situation to make anyone happy.



"The cost to my physical and mental health has also been enormous.



"It is like the end of a nightmare."



Ms Williams, who has has known the client, P, for more than 20 years, says she considers her to be "like a daughter". She was not employed to care for her.



Ms Williams claims management at Manchester Primary Care Trust referred the allegations to the professional bodies and her employers maliciously because she has fought to defend P’s £500,000 round-the-clock care package.



P, who is in her 30s, has a severe mental disorder. She needs monitoring day and night by council carers.



The trust and Manchester council took over the cost of looking after P from authorities in St Helens, Liverpool, after she was moved to a house in Greater Manchester.



Manchester council has lost its appeal to make St Helens council pay for her care.



Manchester Primary Care Trust said: “We completely reject any allegation that financial considerations influenced our actions.



“We received evidence that, if proven, in our view would have constituted misconduct.



"As an NHS body we had a duty to refer this evidence to the appropriate professional bodies.



"It was then a matter for them to decide whether and how to conduct any investigation and what steps to take following that investigation.”



In a written apology to Ms Williams, the trust ‘acknowledges the shortcomings’ of its handling of the case.



It says: “We regret that this may have caused distress and exacerbation of your physical health problems.



"Specifically, the 18-month gap from the lodging of your appeal to the hearing of your appeal should not have happened and I apologise if this has brought you hardship or distress.”