In my investigations into the Smalley case, I’ve just had a response from the UK Council for Psychotherapy as to why they didn’t sanction a therapist who freely admitted he destroyed his notes. It’s so ludicrous I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
The story so far…the UKCP took over three years to investigate a complaint about John Smalley, a Jungian analyst with the Independent Group of Analytical Psychologists. At the end of this inordinate length of time, they concluded that seven allegations had been proven, but they decided not to sanction him anyway. During the hearing before the UKCP’s Central Complaints Process, Smalley freely admitted that he had destroyed his notes.
Destroying notes is normally considered a fitness to practice issue in and of itself. As a registered nurse, the NMC Code specifically bans me from tampering with records. If I were up before the NMC and I told them I’d destroyed my notes relating to the complaint, I’d fully expect them to assume I was hiding something.
The UKCP have posted a response in the comments thread to my last post.
Z, you are correct in that the independent panel did not find the therapist guilty of something of which he was not accused.
This case had four public hearings. The parties were able to present their views, and all were legally represented. And the case was considered by an independent panel. There were 18 different complaints grounds. No complaint was made against the therapist about destroying notes.
So…the reason they didn’t take any action on the destroying of notes is…because the complaints listed weren’t about destroying notes?
Actually, while we’re at it, let’s have a facepalm gif party.