Therapists4Justice

20/01/2024

ear Colleagues, Our next online support meeting for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints procedures will be held on Thursday 25 January at 8.00pm. Please contact us on contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com should you like further information or to attend.
Kind wishes
www.therapists4justice.uk

19/12/2023

During the recent Halloween period the BACP appeared to have cleared a few of its own skeletons out of the closet and imagine the announcement of a targeted review by the PSA might have prompted this. The BACP removed a number of complaint narratives where the outcome was removal of membership, all of which were due to stay in place for five years. In the case of new complaints these are now being listed only with members’ initials and not their full name as before.

In one case where allegations were particularly serious, a member had received two separate complaints and lost their membership as a result. We see BACP has removed one of them completely and deleted the case summary in the other leaving only the ex-member’s name and seemingly without thought as to whether in doing so they were breaching the member’s contracted terms. BACP punishes a therapist harshly for breaching the terms of their own membership, but seemingly turns a blind eye when it comes to fulfilling their own published obligations or taking any account for the impact of their actions upon their members and this must cease.

When BACP and other ethical bodies dismiss a case, they send the case outcome report to the complainant by email giving them 28 days to appeal. If there is no appeal request by that time, the ethical body sends final confirmation of case closure.



Case: In one particular ethical body case, the complainant stated they had not received the case outcomes and it was the BACP on this occasion. BACP gave the complainant a further 28 days.



BACP failed to identify whether they had failed to send the report or the complainant had failed to read it. Either way, this was a failure not caused by the Member and which generated a great deal of stress for them, not least because they had now become aware of the unpredictability and irresponsibility of BACP and its failure to consider the impact of its actions on the member.

Another member who was convicted of a minor misdemeanor by one of the ethical bodies, was told to write an apology to a complainant, despite having giving the complainant apologies before the hearing and the complainant stating in the hearing that they would not accept these apologies.

Despite this information being available to the ethical body, they insisted that the member must apologise in writing again or their membership would be withdrawn. Membership was subsequently withdrawn, the ethical body stating that the member “willfully refused to abide by the authority of the ethical body”. In many cases ethical bodies’ treatment of their members continues to be disproportionately harsh.

The said member was therefore surprised to discover that their case has disappeared without trace after only 11 months of publication and not the five years stated in their membership terms at all.

The ex-member is totally confused. They have written to the ethical body for clarification, not knowing whether they really had a complaint against them in the first place; whether they still have one against them; or, even whether they imagined the whole scenario in their head! They are left wondering whether they have a career as a therapist at all or if was all just a Halloween nightmare.

T4J is actively working to support disproportionately sanctioned therapists and force ethical bodies to produce a fair, proportionate and most importantly a therapist centered procedure rather than one which in T4J’s view is biased towards the complainant. Our experience and that of other therapists we regularly speak to is that the current processes are not in any wait fit for purpose.

Ethical body complaint procedures are continue to be disproportionately harsh and not fit for purpose. T4J are addressing this issue and campaign for reform of these processes.

We hold fortnightly support meetings for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints procedures.

Our next support meeting for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints procedures will be held at 8.00pm on Thursday 11 January 2024. For more information please e-mail us on contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com

Wishing you all the best for the festive season.

T4J
www.therapists4justice.uk

19/11/2023

Dear Colleagues, Our next online support meeting for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints procedures will be held on Thursday 23rd November at 8.00pm. Please contact us on contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com should you like further information or to attend.
Kind wishes
www.therapists4justice.uk

04/11/2023

Dear colleagues,

Our next support meeting for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints processes will be held this coming Thursday (9th) at 8.00pm.

Please e-mail us in advance should you wish to join us.

Best regards

Debra, Terry, Stuart
T4J

Our mission is to support therapist members of counselling/psychotherapy ethical bodies involved in complaints processes and to create change in ethical body complaints processes for a fairer justice system for members and their clients

23/10/2023

Our next support meeting for those experiencing the impact of ethical body complaints procedures will be held on Thursday 26th October at 8.00 via skype. Please contact us via our e-mail contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com should you wish to attend.

Best regards
T4J
23 October 2023

22/10/2023

Therapists4Justice - October 2023

Newsletter

Following reports from colleagues on various counselling and psychotherapy forums, therapists4justice has heard reports of a number of allegations made against ethical bodies.

We are keenly watching the outcome of the controversial James Essex -v- UKCP case which as far as t4j know is the first case of it’s kind ever to be granted audience in an Employment Tribunal owing to the fact that allegations of discrimination on protected belief are alleged.

It seems as though the last couple of weeks have been very busy for the BACP.

It is reported that staff have challenged the management with allegations of serious wrong doing by some of the board and senior leadership, including bullying, extravagant spending of members money on luxuries and the forcing out of staff members and board members who object to this.

We have taken the extracts below from counselling and psychotherapy forum websites which are:-

allegations that a popular a board member has been dismissed this week using Article 38, allegedly for questioning the actions of the board;

allegations that former board members are starting to come forward and talk about their experiences.

allegations that a letter from staff has been leaked alleging bullying, accusations of BACP deviating from it’s own procedures and a low level of trust towards the organisation from staff and moral at an all time low.

One of our founder members recently submitted a 20000 word long and very detailed report on BACP performance in relation to their handling of complaints. This was sent to the Professional Standards Authority and the Charities Commission alleging serious breaches of their codes of practice drawn from over 40 case narratives.

The report was submitted at the beginning of September. We see now that the BACP has been put on "targeted review" by the PSA and do speculate whether the two might be connected? Therapists4justice is aware that no response to the writer of the report has been received from either the PSA or Charities Commission!

Our support meetings for those facing ethical body complaints procedures are held on the 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month. Please e-mail us at contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com should you wish to attend.

Our new and historic newsletters are soon to appear on Facebook and twitter along with other news of our campaigns not always circulated to members of EMDR jiscmail and our new accounts are active from today. We would ask if if colleagues could "friend" "follow" us as appropriate and do whatever you can to make us known to your colleagues who may need support.

As ever all of our newsletters and campaign direction are on our website

I have included the description from the PSA's website of what this means along with a link to their announcement of this targeted review of the BACP.

https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/what-we-do/accredited-registers/find-a-register/detail/british-association-for-counselling-psychotherapy #:~:text=A%20targeted%20review,pdf%3Fsfvrsn%3De5c7220_19

Targeted Review

4.2 The threshold for initiating a targeted review will be related to risk. The criteria
to be used are:

• A change which means that one or more of our minimum requirements are
no longer likely to be met.
• An investigation into the Register by another regulatory body,such as the
Charity Commission or Office of the Scottish Charities Regulator.
• Evidence of a new or potential harm arising from the practices of the
register or its registrants, which appears to be unmitigated.

Best wishes to all

Therapists4Justice

22/10/2023

T4J Newsletter #005 - October 2023

WEB PUBLICATION

Ethical bodies routinely web publish complaints cases until a therapist has completed the sanctions it imposes to its satisfaction or five years if the therapist then leaves BACP.

This contravenes Human Rights because it damages or destroys therapist’s careers.

https://www.bacp.co.uk/about-us/protecting-the-public/professional-conduct/notices/

Whilst some therapists have acted unethically, any of us could find ourselves on one of these sites as a result of a complaint, justifiable or not. Time to end this practice.

BACP’s own Professional Conduct Publication Policy states:

Section 38. Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights protects the right to respect for private and family life and, in this context, the right to a professional reputation. This policy provides a framework for decisions concerning publication which may represent an interference with a Member's Article 8 rights. It provides for a decision to be made for each case on its individual facts.

Consider the following case:

In February 2009, George Appleton strangled 36 year old Clare Wood and burned her body. She had ended a 6 month relationship, but despite a restraining order, he harassed her, damaging property, threatening violence and attempting assault. Greater Manchester Police had not informed her of his three prison sentences for similar offences. The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, or Clare’s Law as it is now known,allows any involved party to enquire if anyone they suspect has a criminal history. Notably, it does not require web-publishing every offender and their cases for the whole world to scrutinize and vilify. Sober reflection might support that regime.

In contrast:

If an ethical body decides that a therapist it judges as being under its jurisdiction has contravened some clause in its extensive ethical code, however minor, it will web-publish its version of the case. This can damage and possibly destroy their career, livelihood and possibly much more because other ethical bodies may refuse them, along with EAP’s and advertisers too. Anyone searching the therapist’s name can access the data for their own purposes and the notice can remain for five years, and more if the ethical body forgets to remove it.

The question to be asked

Is a therapist who has forgotten to tell a client they were away one day or, one who was in civil dispute with their neighbour unconnected with counselling more dangerous to the public than a violent offender with a string of conviction? The answer is obvious. Web publication is grossly disproportionate, especially when it is made searchable for the public. That must cease immediately. Far from protecting the public, it can destroy potentially capable therapists on the basis of a single event, removing them from their existing clients and indeed any future ones.

We offer support meetings every 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month at 8.00pm. We can also offer one-to-one support and can often identify breaches of ethical body procedures to support the defence of a complaint, in addition to helping with preliminary responses should you be involved in a case currently. Please contact us individually and confidentially on our e-mail address contacttherapistsforjustice@gmail.com should you wish to join our support group or need further confidential assistance.

With best wishes and thank you for reading.

David Waite
Therapists4justice.uk
e-mail: contacttherapistsforjustice@gmail.com

22/10/2023

T4J Newsletter #004 - September 2023

COMPLAINT TO THE CHARITY COMMISSION AND PSA REGARDING BACP HANDLING OF COMPLAINTS PROCEDURES

therapists4justice.uk has worked hard over the last year compiling data on the BACP complaints process.

A long and detailed report on BACP performance has now gone to the Professional Standards Authority and the Charity Commission alleging serious breaches of their codes of practice drawn from over 40 case narratives.

Some of the main allegations are:

BACP has built a complaints system which can destroy the careers and indeed lives of therapists on the basis of unproven and minor allegations. Its actions are regularly out of proportion.
BACP has allowed its lawyers to run an Adversarial system which pits the complainant against the therapist around one case when it should be managing an Inquisitorial system identifying ‘Fitness to Practice’. A fundamental error.
BACP operates principally on two levels: what it does in practice and what it tells its stakeholders: e.g. Members and the PSA. They are very different stories.
BACP has not declared a willingness to examine its own processes or their outcomes.
The report also addresses the devastating practice of web-publication of complaints cases.

As ever we hold support meetings at 8.00 on the 2nd and 4th Thursdays of the month.

Please inform your colleagues and spread the word.

Thank you

David Waite
Therapists4justice.uk
contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com

22/10/2023

T4J Newsletter #003 - August 2023

BACP NEW SUPPORT OFFICER ROLES

Last month we noted that BACP’s response to the rising concerns about its complaints process was to start revising the ethical code by which it judges counsellors. So, no revision to the complaints process!

This month we note that BACP is seems to be accepting that support in its complaints process is inadequate. It is seeking ‘confidential’ supporters, but then says these are required to report evidence of guilt to the P*P, so they are not confidential. Therapists4justice are struggling to understand this.

At some time, we hope that BACP may review its whole philosophy on this and seek member input.

Please feel free to contact us at contacttherapists4justice@gmail.com if you have a comment, need some help understanding the complaints procedure or just want to help in our campaign.



David Waite

22/10/2023

T4J Newsletter #002 - February 2023

We are monitoring the BACP Professional Conduct Procedure publications and finding changes. There seems to be a lot fewer new cases than we would expect.

Perhaps BACP is taking heed of what we are saying? Is it coming to accept that its jurisdiction is over members, and that ends when they leave?

We have observed a serious case in which BACP declared it would not suspend or withdraw membership. We feel sure it would have done so some months ago.

Perhaps BACP is now considering the proportionality of its sanction decisions? However, BACP still fails to understand that the web-publication of cases is by far the greatest sanction because it can turn off the flow of work, and very often does.

David Waite

22/10/2023

T4J Newsletter #001 - November 2022

COMPLAINTS PROCEDURES CAN SERIOUSLY DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH!

BACP has revised the Terms and Conditions members are required to sign up to.

A main item of change seems to be spelling out its ‘on line’ Publication Policy as an annually confirmed condition of membership. All members should view the current conduct notices and consider its potential impact.

https://www.bacp.co.uk/…/professional-conduct/notices/

Anyone can be subject to a complaint at any time regardless of how competent they may be because people come to us with mental and emotional problems, and some may wish to transfer their issues onto us. Does your ethical body employ assessors who understand the modalities it purports to represent when investigating such issues?

An ethical body’s remit is to support and maintain professional standards within its own organisation. It should support a Member who has fallen short or even exclude them. We would all agree to that. The Professional Standards Authority (PSA), requires member organisations to protect the public it has responsibility for; the clients of its

Members, not the entire planet. It should not attempt to influence a therapist’s status beyond its organisational remit.

At one time, brief outlines were published in a ‘trade’ magazine. The numbers who read these notices was very limited. Now the Member and ex-Member have their name published on line along with the ethical body’s extensive version of any proceedings so that any person in the world can use or misuse that information for their own purposes. This can remain on the site for up to 5 years.

Not only can this destroy a therapist’s current work but their career too because other ethical bodies will not normally accept someone with a posted complaint. And the advertisers will not either.

If the case has sexual or child issues within it, publication can destroy people’s lives too.

Further, verdicts have been found to be opinion rather than anything which can be proven. And there are cases where the opinion can be shown to be incorrect.

Competent therapists are having their careers and sometimes their whole lives destroyed by ethical body opinions. This can happen to you at any time.

The practice of online publication should be stopped. It is grossly disproportionate and in conflict with PSA, Charity Commission and ICO guidelines. It also exposes the ethical body to single or class suits from damaged members under the Defamation Act 2013. However much CEOs may delegate decisions down to procedures, they can ultimately be made personally responsible for the organisation’s actions. Note that BACP’s CEO and deputy CEO have recently resigned.

https://www.bacp.co.uk/about-us/protecting-the-public/professional-conduct/notices/

David Waite

28/08/2023

Welcome to our new page. We offer support for those who are experiencing or have experienced counselling and psychotherapy ethical body complaints processes and campaign for reform of those processes. We meet on the 2nd and 4th Thursday online at 8.00pm for colleagues who wish to join. The 8.00pm meeting is a group support form. Please contact us for details or to be included in our mailing list. Thank you Admin Support