Psychologist Board of Australia v Golus

In the matter of Psychologist Board of Australia versus Golus, the respondent, an Australian psychologist, admitted to failing to maintain professional boundaries with a client. The case was heard by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the respondent’s conduct constituted unsatisfactory professional conduct. Additionally, the Tribunal needed to determine if the proposed sanction was appropriate given the circumstances.

The Tribunal found that the respondent’s actions did indeed constitute unsatisfactory professional conduct. The Tribunal accepted the evidence that the respondent had breached the professional boundaries by engaging in a personal relationship with a client. The Tribunal considered the respondent’s admission of guilt and the agreed sanction proposed by the parties. The Tribunal concluded that the agreed sanction, which included a reprimand, supervision, and other conditions, was appropriate and proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the respondent’s conduct. The Tribunal noted that the respondent had already taken steps to address the issue, including undertaking professional development and engaging in supervision.

The Tribunal made several orders in relation to the respondent’s registration as a psychologist. The respondent was reprimanded, and the reprimand was recorded on the respondent’s registration and remained in place for 12 months. The Tribunal also imposed a range of conditions on the respondent’s registration, including undertaking supervision, allowing the Board to contact and exchange information with the respondent’s supervisor and employer, and notifying the Board of any changes in the respondent’s practising arrangements. The Tribunal also prohibited the publication of certain information to protect the identity of a junior administrative officer. The Tribunal made no order as to costs.