Psychologist engaging in sexual relationship with 18-year-old client
On 18 March 2013 Dr Tania van Megchelen was found to have engaged in unprofessional conduct of a serious nature and professional misconduct. These findings were in relation to a prolonged sexual relationship with a former female client referred to as XX. This judgment delivers the determinations of the Tribunal.
In April 2004 Dr van Megchelen, who was in her early thirties, engaged in a sexual relationship with XX who was only 18 years of age. The difference in age was said to contribute to a power imbalance that already existed in the relationship of Psychologist and client. Throughout the duration of the relationship it was stated that XX was a vulnerable person as she suffered from emotional and mental health problems. The sexual activity occurred shortly after XX turned 18, although prior to this, when XX was 16 and 17 years old, Dr van Megchelen had frequent social and personal contact with XX in defiance of XX's mothers express requests.
The Psychology Board (Board) claimed that cancellation of registration is the most appropriate order. The Board argued that they could not be confident that the behaviour of Dr van Megchelen would not continue. The Board also submitted that the age difference between the two and the demonstrable lack of insight shown by Dr van Megchelen justified a decision to cancel her registration.
The Board further asserted that the gravity of Dr van Megchelen's lack of insight was heightened by the fact that she had completed a Doctorate in clinical psychology in the area of the maintenance of professional boundaries by psychologists. The Board submitted that Dr van Megchelen's very poor insight into the issue of professional boundaries raised an issue of public safety.
The Tribunal explained that the two primary objectives of the determination should be the protection of the public, by preventing persons who are unfit to practice from practising; and the maintenance of the professional standards of the profession of psychology in the eyes of the public. For the reputation of the profession of psychology to be protected, the determination imposed must adequately reflect the seriousness of the conduct.
The Tribunal found that cancellation was an appropriate order given:
- the presence of aggravating features such as the age difference, the vulnerability of XX and the previous contact in defiance of an express request by XX's mother;
- the serious nature of the unprofessional conduct and professional misconduct;
- the prolonged period over which certain misconduct continued;
- the absence of any demonstrable insight on the part of Dr van Megchelen during the course of the hearing, in relation to boundary transgressions;
- the apparent defiant attitude of the Dr van Megchelen under cross-examination in either denying or minimising any adverse consequence that the dual relationship had upon XX; and
- the fragile and vulnerable nature of XX from the outset and which culminated in further psychological and psychiatric counselling and treatment within the currency of the dual relationship.
The Tribunal affirmed that Dr van Megchelen had engaged in two counts of unprofessional conduct and one count of professional misconduct and ordered:
- Dr Tania van Megchelen be reprimanded;
- The registration of Dr van Megchelen be suspended for a period of 18 months, with effect from 1 June 2013;
- In addition to any mandatory professional development required by the Psychology Board of Australia, during the period of suspension, Dr van Megchelen commence further education and training for a period of not less than 12 months, in relation to professional ethics, boundary issues and dual and multiple relationships.