June 2024: BF, Reference No 00923872, Registrant ID 384607
June 2024: Benjamin Ford, Reference No 00923872, Registrant ID 384607
Outcome Details
Consensual Disposal
Reasons
1. Benjamin Ford, a BACP individual member, agrees to the following outcome of the investigation into a complaint of a failure to meet the Professional Standards under reference PCP[…].
Background
2. Benjamin Ford has been a BACP member since […].
3. The Member works in […]
4. On 13th January Year 2 a complaint was made about the Member’s conduct, in summary:
The Complainant stated that on 8 June Year 1, the Member breached confidentiality by informing his […] that he was working with the Complainant. […].
The Member informed the Complainant over email on 27 June Year 1 that the breach had taken place. The Complainant had not consented to the breach of confidentiality. The Member informed the Complainant that he believed there was […], therefore, the Member stated he wanted to limit risk to the Complainant. The Member confirmed to the Complainant that he asked […] to not have any contact with the Complainant in order to allow time for the Member to discuss the dual relationship with the Complainant. The Member also stated that it was so that the Complainant and […] did not have to make the link themselves.
As there was a 19-day gap from the breach of confidentiality occurring and the Complainant being informed of the breach, the Complainant believed that the Member ought to have been more prompt in informing her of the breach, in order to limit the risk of harm. This is especially as the Member believed it to be a serious situation with 'immediate risk'.
The Complainant attempted to resolve the matter with the Member, however, the Complainant detailed that she did not receive an apology from the Member regarding the breach. The Complainant added that the Member has demonstrated a lack of insight regarding disclosure/consent. The Complainant stated that the Member deflected and defended matters, for example, he stated that he did not inform the Complainant sooner as he only works part time. Further, the Member did not class […] as being a 'member of the public'.
The Complainant suggested to the Member that he ought to discuss the breach of confidentiality in supervision and the Complainant detailed that she does not feel that should have been her duty. The Complainant also believed that the breach put her at risk and is therefore a safeguarding issue. The Complainant stated that the Member seemed to not be aware and up to date with safeguarding and BACP's Ethical Framework. The Complainant detailed that the Member informed her that BACP ought to have reminded him about safeguarding.
As a result of the breach, the Complainant is also concerned that […].
At the time of the complaint, a friend of the […].
The Complainant is concerned that further information will be shared […]. The Complainant believed that as a result of the breach, she has to restrict social activities and communications in order to avoid any overlaps with the Member […], as she does not feel safe after the breach and wants to avoid any further breaches. The Complainant believed she has been penalised for the Member's actions.
Admissions
5. The Member makes the following admissions which the BACP accepts
Allegation 1
1.1 By sharing information about the Complainant with […], the Member
breached the Complainant’s confidentiality:
(a) without justification and/or
(b) without the Complainant’s permission
Allegation 2
2.1 The Member failed to inform the Complainant in a timely manner of his breach of her
confidentiality
Allegation 3
3.1 The Member failed to apologise:
(a) at all and/or
(b) in a timely manner
to the Complainant and/or deal appropriately with his breach of the Complainant’s
confidentiality
Mitigation
6. The Member puts forward the following in mitigation, which has been taken into account by the IAC in deciding the appropriate outcome.
The Member has undertaken much supervision, personal therapy and self-reflection surrounding the entirety of the situation and now understands that the correct course of action upon his realisation of the dual relationship would have been to attempt to work collaboratively with the client to identify healthy and respectful boundaries. He wishes that he were able to have learnt such a lesson without it impacting others so much.
The Member continues to feel sorry that his breaching confidentiality, however well intentioned, placed his attempt to minimise the potential for physical harm before protecting the client’s privacy, dignity and confidentiality. The Member accepts that this was an error of professional judgement, that he had misinterpreted the Ethical Framework by placing the principle of non-maleficence before the Professional Standard of respect for the client.
The Member still feels a lot of shame mixed with sadness that he has thrown the profession into disrepute and caused unintended distress to the Complainant by exposing the privacy of their identity and engagement in therapy with him to […].
The Member sees, regardless of any health matters, that it is still a breach of professional standards that he did not act immediately to notify the client and undertake steps at harm-reduction. He feels sorrow and frustration at the turn of events that led to the delay in notifying the client; he wishes he had been more able to act immediately to notify the client, reduce harm and ruptures in trust and repair where possible.
The Member acted before seeking supervision. The Member feels remorse for the distress to the Complainant and frustration at himself for acting before seeking supervision. The Member has explored the unconscious patterning […] surrounding acting quickly before taking supervision and this brought much into his conscious awareness so that it does not impede him in the future.
Not apologising to the Complainant for the confidentiality breach in a timely way, led to a diminishment of trust in the Member. The Member now wishes that in the email he wrote to the Complainant apologising for the delay that he did not also include an apology for the breach.
The Member has undertaken training in Level 3 safeguarding to refresh his understanding of identifying all […], how to handle information, disclosure and acting from a person-centred approach.
The Member has also completed his EMDR standard Europe Training which has significantly developed his understanding of working with trauma and how to identify clients that are suitable for him to work with based on his experience level.
The Member continues to engage with […] .
Conclusion
7. The issues identified and admitted by the Member amount to breaches of the professional standards reasonably expected of the Member having regard to the Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling and Psychotherapy 2018 in particular:
Allegation 1
1.2 The Member thereby failed to meet professional standards, including in particular by acting in a way which was inconsistent with paragraphs 21 and/or 55 (a) of ‘Good Practice ’ in the Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions 2018 which state:
21: We will respect our clients ’privacy and dignity.
55: We will protect the confidentiality and privacy of clients by:
a. actively protecting information about clients from unauthorised access or disclosure
Allegation 2
2.2 The Member thereby failed to meet professional standards, including in particular by acting in a way which was inconsistent with paragraphs 8 and/or 12 and/or 52 (a), and/or
52 (b) and/or 52 (c) and/or 52 (d) and/or 52 (e) of ‘Good Practice ’in the Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions 2018 which state:
8: Any professional or personal interests that conflict with putting a client’s interests first will be carefully considered in consultation with a supervisor, an independent experienced colleague or, when appropriate, discussed with the client affected before services are offered.
12: We will do everything we can to develop and protect our clients ’trust
52: We will ensure candour by being open and honest about anything going wrong and promptly inform our clients of anything in our work that places clients at risk of harm, or
has caused them harm, whether or not the client(s) affected are aware of what has occurred by:
a. taking immediate action to prevent or limit any harm
b. repairing any harm caused, so far as possible
c. offering an apology when this is appropriate
d. notifying and discussing with our supervisor and/or manager what has occurred
e. investigating and take action to avoid whatever has gone wrong being repeated
Allegation 3
3.2 The Member thereby failed to meet professional standards, including in particular by acting in a way which was inconsistent with paragraphs 12 and/or 52 (a), and/or 52 (b) and/or 52 (c) and/or 52 (d) and/or 52 (e) of ‘Good Practice ’in the Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions 2018 which state:
12: We will do everything we can to develop and protect our clients ’trust
52: We will ensure candour by being open and honest about anything going wrong and promptly inform our clients of anything in our work that places clients at risk of harm, or has caused them harm, whether or not the client(s) affected are aware of what has occurred by:
a. taking immediate action to prevent or limit any harm
b. repairing any harm caused, so far as possible
c. offering an apology when this is appropriate
d. notifying and discussing with our supervisor and/or manager what has occurred
e. investigating and take action to avoid whatever has gone wrong being repeated
8. One of the aims of the Professional Conduct Procedure is to protect members of the public. The IAC in considering the appropriate outcome and sanction for the admitted breaches in this case have taken into account the interests of public protection and determined that it is reasonable and proportionate to conclude it on the terms set out below.
9. In relation to the findings above the IAC considers it appropriate that the Member is to:
(1) Provide to BACP, within 6 weeks of entering into a Consensual Disposal Agreement, evidence of completion of a minimum of 6 hours of continuing professional development, as defined by BACP, using a wide range of learning materials, and to provide BACP information on what sources of learning you used. Learning should be sought on how to handle ethical dilemmas in counselling/psychotherapy focusing in particular on:
(a) balancing confidentiality against disclosure
(b) maintaining professional boundaries, particularly around disclosure
and how such issues can be resolved particularly in small communities
The BACP defines continuing professional development as:
Any learning experience that can be used for the systematic maintenance, improvement and broadening of competence, knowledge and skills to ensure that the practitioner has the capacity to practice safely, effectively and legally within their evolving scope of practice. It may include both personal and professional development.
(2) Having completed the above training, to provide to BACP a reflective piece addressing:
(a) what went wrong in this case, demonstrating self-awareness and acknowledging the points in the process where you made the wrong decisions
(b) the impact of your conduct on the Complainant, on BACP and the wider counselling professions
(c) your learning from this case and how you will put/have put your new and enhanced learning into practice with your clients, referencing the relevant parts of the Ethical Framework 2018
(d) any changes you have made to your practice in light of this complaint and how you have embedded these changes into your practice
(e) to confirm to BACP that you have discussed these points with your supervisor.
(3) Having completed the above reflection, within 8 weeks of entering into a Consensual Disposal Agreement, to provide BACP with a sincere and genuine letter of apology to the Complainant identifying and acknowledging each of those points in your dealings with her where you made the wrong decision and apologising to her for the impact of each of these decisions on her and how you have amended your practice in light of her complaint.
10. The Member agrees that this Agreement will be published by the BACP in line with the Publication Policy and that it will be disclosed to the Complainant.
11. The Member agrees that he will not act in any way inconsistent with this agreement such as, for example, by denying the admissions in paragraph 5 above.
12. If the Member fails, without good reason, to comply with the sanction set out above or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement the matter will be referred to a sanction panel for consideration. A sanction panel my determine that it will terminate his membership. Such a decision will be published.
(Where ellipses [ . . . ] are displayed, they indicate an omission of text)