This week, the tribunal found the social worker, who was granted name suppression and didn’t engage in the hearing, had acted in a “highly inappropriate” manner that had the potential to cause significant harm to the woman and her three children.
It opted to cancel the man’s licence and order him to pay $22,000 in legal costs.
According to evidence presented to the tribunal, the man first registered as a social worker in 2013 and prior to the allegations against him appeared to be well-regarded and dedicated to his profession.
In 2021, he was working in a team working with families and children, specifically with young people who were in the custody of Oranga Tamaraiki.
He was the assigned social worker for a woman, known only as Ms X in the decision, and her three children. The children were in the custody of the agency, but two of them lived with their mother.
By October 2021 the man’s supervisor became aware of rumours of a possible relationship between him and Ms X and confronted him about it.
The man claimed he had developed romantic feelings for the woman and disclosed those to her, and that she had told him she felt the same.
A meeting was convened between the man and his supervisors where it was noted that if he had engaged in a relationship with Ms X then it would have been a breach of Oranga Tamariki’s code of conduct and would need to be reported to the registration board.
However, the man claimed he hadn’t acted on those feelings “due to the potential impact on his career, and the possible impact on his own children”.
The fact the respondent’s attachment to Ms X created a conflict of interest and potential breach of professional boundaries was discussed at the meeting.
Despite this, other than assigning a new social worker to the family no further action was taken by Oranga Tamariki to investigate the extent of the relationship.
By February 2022 the woman disclosed to a new social worker she was pregnant but refused to tell them who the father was. A second meeting was called between the original social worker and his supervisors where he denied he was the father.
In April, the social worker resigned from his role, and by May a third complaint had been filed with the agency alleging the man and Ms X were in a romantic relationship.
Oranga Tamariki then made a mandatory report to the registration board in July 2022.
‘The relationship was inappropriate’
Neither the social worker nor Ms X engaged with the tribunal when it held a hearing into the allegations earlier this year.
However, the tribunal found that on “the balance of probabilities” there had been an inappropriate relationship.
“This was done in the knowledge that the relationship was inappropriate, was a breach of his professional responsibilities, and in the face of a clear statement by his employer that a relationship with Ms X would be inappropriate,” its ruling notes.
The tribunal also found the man had lied to his supervisors about the extent of the relationship to avoid any adverse consequences.
“When he developed personal feelings for Ms X, rather than disclose those to her while he remained the social worker to her children the respondent should have sought supervision and advice,” the tribunal found.
“The respondent should also have removed himself earlier from having direct professional responsibility for the children. The respondent had the opportunity to speak honestly about the relationship in October 2021 and again in March 2022 (and during the intervening period) and did not.”
The tribunal noted the man’s actions had the potential to cause significant harm by undermining the confidence the children whom he was caring for had in his ability to work in their best interests.
There was also potential for his actions to impact the safety and wellbeing of the children, which was important given Ms X was attempting to regain custody of her children.
A professional conduct committee of the registration board, which prosecuted the man before the tribunal, said the man was aware of Ms X’s vulnerability and there was a significant power imbalance between the two.
“The tribunal has found that the respondent acted in a highly inappropriate manner by entering a personal relationship with Ms X while he was the social worker assigned to her children.”
It also considered the potential to cause significant harm to Ms X and her children should have been readily foreseeable.
“The respondent did not meet important ethical duties and professional standards over a prolonged period, notwithstanding his knowledge of his responsibilities as an experienced social worker, and the availability of supportive colleagues and supervision.
“His dishonesty has led to more serious consequences than may otherwise have been the outcome.”
The tribunal opted to cancel the man’s registration as a social worker, though this lapsed in 2022 after his resignation from Oranga Tamariki. It also censured him and ordered him to pay $22,000 in legal costs.
General manager people and high performance Elizabeth Blanchfield said Oranga Tamariki couldn’t discuss individual employment matters, but it treated any allegation of professional misconduct seriously.
“Oranga Tamariki responded as quickly as we were able to in this matter and following a formal process made the referral to the SWRB at the appropriate time.”
Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.
