Social Workers - call for help (16)

"An ex partner made allegations of violence against you to the police concerning participation at a small private BDSM club, which the police decided to take no further action following advice received from the Crown Prosecution Service.

The General Social Care Council (GSCC) has reviewed the information received from you and also information received from your employer and decided to take no further action because the allegations do not meet the threshold for misconduct and as such do not call into question your suitability to practice as a Social Worker.

The GSCC has made this decision because it considered the information related to matters concerning your private life outside of work which the GSCC determined are not in the public interest to proceed with.

The GSCC has further not identified any evidence of any risk presented to service users."

----

In Aug 2011 Backlash had originally posted:

Backlash needs help. We were approached for advice about images on a computer and mobile seized by the police, arising from actions by someone other than the owner. This is a case of "collateral damage".

The original issue has been resolved satisfactorily.

However, because they are a social worker, client safeguarding procedures kick in and have caused the employer to start formal disciplinary procedures.

In essence this Council have said they must decide if attending a private club where violence is undertaken is compatible with a social worker's code of conduct.

They appear to accept there is no indication bdsm activities have affected professional judgement, nor that this individual has behaved in any way other than an intensely private manner.

There are no strange aspects. No grounds for criticism other than private participation in bdsm, no involvement with clients, no publicity, no breach of employee conditions, no need to rely on unorthodox arguments.

The code in question is that of the General Social Care Council. The GSCC publish all their disciplinary decisions, which take place after an individual Council's own process.

But of the 248 cases in the last 5 years, 33 elected to have their GSCC hearing in private. Consequently only their names, decision and the date of the decision are available, not the details.

A search of the public cases does not throw up any bdsm examples.

Lawyers will of course pursue the usual channels for precedents We are aware of the recent General Teaching Council's sensible decision.

Meanwhile this thread asks if social workers or others working closely with them in the NHS or Police can point to any previous GSCC disciplinary cases involving BDSM that may not be visible.

By memo (or email to sw@backlash-uk.org.uk) if tactless to post on this public thread.

Thanks. Any help is appreciated.

In case they jog memories, below were the cases that lack details, which we have since removed to simplify this post.

Please note this thread is specifically about identifying relevant precedents, not the merits of a social worker playing. If you wish to discuss that feel free to do so on another thread, per the YKIOK clause in the AUP.

ps This is a long thread; please don't requote it if replying.

Edited Mon 28 May 12, 9:01 PM by backlash_uk

Human Resources have to comply with this regarding ,gender , sexual orientation etc .

I hope it goes well x

IANAL (I am not a lawyer, you dirty mind!), but AFAIK BDSM/DS are not a recongised orientation in the legal sense. Any legal professionals on the board feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

There are specific conditions that can never be put on a code of conduct (like racial discrimination etc), but if the involvment with BDSM was made public (rather than just a part of a police investigation), my understanding is that for most code of conducts, that would constitute 'gross indecency'

I know its not fair, but as far as I;m aware this is the legal position, which is why you ll never see my face pic on this or any other D/S related sites.

Good luck, and please let us know what happens!

No matter what the question is, the answer's still 42!

Best of luck.

Fitz.

Escaped from the parallel universe

isn't that the old (and outlawed) offence of having gay sex?

And all men kill the thing they love, By all let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword!

You 're right... apologies for using the wrong terminology.

The appropriate term is ' Indecent behaviour'

Hate the fact I used a wrong -and possibly offensive- term, and do apologise to anyone who may be offended... the only thing to say in my defense is that English is not my native language.

No matter what the question is, the answer's still 42!

Article 8 of the Human Rights Act could be used, but it would have to be argued nothing happened in a public place. I remember arguing this with my law lecturer in year one.

~ It is always by way of pain one arrives at pleasure ~

It is altogether possible that the case will be summarily dismissed without good evidence that the social worker in question actually participated in an action which is illegal in some way.

Apparently the GSCC were consulted by this Council as part of their preliminay investigation and the implication was that the GSCC felt a formal enquiry was necessary.

Behave in a way, in work or outside work, which would call into question your suitability to work in social care services.

I'm not sure on the Freedom of Information Act and whether an FOI request would mean that you could get more information?

And I'm probably trying to teach grandma to suck eggs here but perhaps looking at social work forums may be worth a try to see if those people would perhaps contact you?

If you look in the mirror and don't like what you see
You can find out first-hand what it's like to be me
The End - MCR