Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) Decisions

The following are summaries of some recent decisions of the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, reflecting three different dispositions. They are provided for educational purposes. Information in these summaries has been altered to protect the privacy of both members and complainants, and to protect the confidentiality of the investigation process. The relevant substance of the allegations and outcomes remain unchanged.

Access to a Report regarding a Child: Decision: Take No Further Action

A complainant alleged that a psychologist inappropriately failed to provide her with a report of her child’s evaluation, which was done in the context of family litigation. In her response, the registrant indicated that the services provided to the child client were therapeutic. An evaluation was conducted by a third party, and the registrant had indicated to the complainant that any request for a copy of that evaluation report should be directed to the third party.

The panel of the ICRC considering this matter noted that the registrant had offered to meet with the complainant to offer her information about the child’s therapy. The panel also noted that while the complainant appeared to be under the mistaken impression that the registrant had conducted an evaluation, notes in the clinical record indicated that the registrant had discussed the nature of services with the complainant at the beginning of the service provision. The panel acknowledged that family litigation can be confusing and stressful for families. However, it appears to the panel that the registrant acted appropriately. The panel therefore decided to take no further action with respect to the complaint.

Appropriateness of File Transfer: Decision: Advice

An employer made a report to the College, indicating that after a psychologist left their employ, they discovered that certain documents had not been appropriately transferred or filed. In response to the allegations, the registrant expressed shock and dismay that this had occurred and indicated this had been an accidental error. Through its investigation, the panel also learned that these documents had remained in a secure location and there was no evidence of inappropriate access or disclosure of these documents.

The panel believed that the impact risk was low in this matter, since, while misfiled, the documents remained in a secure location and were not requested by anyone for a number of years. The panel also believed that the recurrence risk was low as the registrant acknowledged the error, expressed remorse, and there was no information to suggest a pattern of mishandling documents. The panel therefore decided to provide the member with Advice in relation to appropriate record-keeping.

Acting Outside of Authorized Area of Practice: Decision: Undertakings

The complainant raised numerous concerns about a registrant that arose in the context of couples counselling. Upon investigation, it became apparent that this registrant was not authorized to provide services to Couples.

The panel did not identify any substantive concerns with respect to the registrant’s treatment of this couple. However, the panel also noted that practicing outside of one’s authorized areas of practice and populations can pose risks to the public, as there may be gaps in the registrant’s knowledge or experience which can lead to poor or dangerous outcomes to clients. As such, the panel believed it was appropriate and in the public interest to seek Undertakings from the registrant that she would cease autonomously providing services to Couples unless and until the Registration Committee approves the expansion of her authorized client populations to include Couples.