HCCC v Stanton [2019] NSWCATOD 58

HCCC v Stanton [2019] NSWCATOD 58

The practitioner's conduct with two vulnerable patients, involving boundary violations, sexualised interactions, and an abuse of the therapeutic relationship, constitutes professional misconduct of such seriousness as to warrant cancellation of registration and prohibition from providing health services. His diagnosed mental health condition does not mitigate this misconduct due to lack of insight, candour, and ongoing risk to public health and safety.

Parties
Applicant: Health Care Complaints Commission; Respondent: Daniel Stanton, also known as Daniel Rouse-Stanton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Proceedings / Final Determination
Outcome
Practitioner found guilty of professional misconduct; registration would have been cancelled if still registered; prohibition from health services; costs order; non-publication of patient names.
Legal Topics
Professional Misconduct, Psychology, Sexual Misconduct, Health Services Prohibition, Boundary Violations
Health Law Professional Regulation Professional Misconduct Psychology Sexual Misconduct Health Services Prohibition Boundary Violations

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Health Care Complaints Commission

Applicant

Daniel Stanton, also known as Daniel Rouse-Stanton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Disciplinary Proceedings / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the practitioner hug Patient B at the end of a psychology session?
  2. 2 Is the conduct of such seriousness as to be professional misconduct?
  3. 3 What role, if any, does Mr Rouse-Stanton's diagnosed mental health condition play in the assessment of the seriousness of his professional failures and in determining the appropriate protective orders?

Ratio Decidendi

The practitioner's conduct with two vulnerable patients, involving boundary violations, sexualised interactions, and an abuse of the therapeutic relationship, constitutes professional misconduct of such seriousness as to warrant cancellation of registration and prohibition from providing health services. His diagnosed mental health condition does not mitigate this misconduct due to lack of insight, candour, and ongoing risk to public health and safety.

Court Disposition

Practitioner found guilty of professional misconduct; registration would have been cancelled if still registered; prohibition from health services; costs order; non-publication of patient names.

Orders

  • Pursuant to a finding of professional misconduct, under s 149C(4)(a), the Tribunal would have cancelled the practitioner's registration as a psychologist if he had still been registered.
  • The National Board is required to record the fact that the Tribunal would have cancelled the practitioner's registration had he still been registered per s 149C(4)(c).