Social workers sanctioned for misconduct including accessing confidential files; dishonesty

A social worker was devastated at the loss of a job she loved, after she accessed confidential documents for a report to the Family Court. Photo / 123RF

A social worker censured for accessing confidential documents to help family members in a sensitive legal case was one of two sanctioned in the last year.

The social worker, whose name is suppressed, was censured for accessing confidential documents held by Oranga Tamariki to write a report to the Family Court, which was related to her family.

The disciplinary charge was heard last year by the Social Workers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal.

Following an employment investigation, the woman lost the job she had "poured her heart and soul" into.

Between January 2012 and December 2015, she accessed records held by Care and Protection, Youth Justice, Residential and Adoption Services (CYRAS) that related to her family members or other people known to her.

In December 2016 she provided a confidential report to the Family Court as part of an application by her partner's daughter wanting her two children returned to her care.

A social worker was censured last year for accessing confidential documents to write a report to the Family Court, which was related to her family. Photo / 123RF

A Tauranga social worker was the other person disciplined in the past year, for dishonestly obtaining $500 in the course of her work.

Her registration was cancelled in June last year in relation to an earlier disciplinary charge following her conviction for theft from a former employer.

She was censured and ordered to pay $10,887 in costs.

The charge against the social worker who accessed the confidential material was laid in December 2019, but after several Covid-induced adjournments, it was not heard until July last year.

The tribunal's findings explained that CYRAS is the main electronic case management system used by Oranga Tamariki. It records information relevant to the management of a case.

Oranga Tamariki employees who used CYRAS are identified in the system by a unique code. An electronic footprint is created each time a record is opened and edited.

The CYRAS footprint relied upon in the charge against the social worker was obtained in April 2018 following a complaint to Oranga Tamariki regarding the release of the report.

The complaint was made by the former wife of the social worker's partner and triggered an investigation into the social worker's access to confidential information relating to her family.

Among the lengthy list of findings, the tribunal accepted the social worker's belief that one-off access to the records was authorised. It also found her personal interests had overridden her professional obligations to respect the privacy of Oranga Tamariki clients and the confidentiality of CYRAS records.

In setting penalties, the tribunal considered the social worker's evidence that at times she was working in exceptionally difficult and pressured circumstances with very heavy caseloads, including highly complex cases.

She described experiencing trauma as a consequence of the nature of her work and her workload and that access to supervision was inconsistent.

The social worker had a caseload of 70 children across a huge geographical area.

The tribunal ultimately found she accessed confidential records without justification.

"By her own admission, she was motivated by what she thought were the best interests of the children and would do what she felt was necessary in that regard.

"We find that on the balance of probabilities [Ms K]'s concerns about her step-grandchildren led her to view CYRAS files which she knew were confidential."

In July 2013, the social worker and her partner underwent a parenting assessment, which looked into her and her partner's ability and suitability to provide long-term care for two of their grandchildren.

The report relies on several sources of information, including information obtained from the supervising social worker for the children and CYRAS records.

In December 2016, the social worker annexed the report to an affidavit filed in the Family Court in support of an application by her partner's daughter for day-to-day care of two of her children.

Despite the confidential notice stamped in bold on the report, the social worker and her partner were "emphatic" that as the report held their own personal information, they could use it as they saw fit.

They minimised the extent to which the report contained information about others including her partner's ex-wife, and which had the potential to cause harm or distress.

The social worker acknowledged difficulty in separating her professional role from her response to situations in her personal life.

She was also adamant that her subsequent experience and growth as a practitioner would allow her to avoid similar situations if she returned to practice.

The tribunal factored in the personal toll on the social worker, who described being devastated by the loss of a job she loved.

It decided that censure and tailored conditions were appropriate, including that she notify any prospective employer of the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings, and that supervision would be required for 12 months after returning to social work practice.