A Melbourne psychologist began a coercive relationship with a young client while she was particularly vulnerable, moved her into a unit on his mother’s property, and shared confidential details about other clients with her, a tribunal has heard.
Counsel representing the Psychology Board of Australia, Stephanie Joosten, said the psychologist Jonathon Walker began treating the client in 2013, when the client was 21 and he was 41.
She had been referred to Walker by her GP as she was experiencing anxiety and depression. She received 16 psychology sessions from him until September 2014 as evidenced by Medicare billing records and notes Walker provided to her GP.
It was during this treatment, in approximately July 2014, that Walker began to communicate with her via email outside treatment sessions, the Victorian civil and administrative tribunal (Vcat) heard on Wednesday.
“The content of those emails developed into a more personal and sexual nature,” Joosten said.
The woman alleges that Walker told her he had developed feelings for her. Joosten said Walker began meeting his client outside psychological treatment sessions. During their meetings, Walker told his client he was sexually attracted to some of his other clients, the tribunal heard.
Vcat heard Walker, who represented himself, had declined to take part in the proceeding, and instead had made extensive written submissions to Vcat, much of which was irrelevant to the allegations against him, and some of which was prejudicial towards him and needed to be disregarded.
Joosten said in Walker’s absence, she would summarise his position in response to the allegations. She told the tribunal that Walker disputed “who was the instigator of the more personal aspects of the relationship”.
In July 2014, the woman went to Walker’s house where there was intimate contact, Joosten said. She was in a relationship at the time, “which Mr Walker was aware of,” the tribunal heard. She then went on a trip overseas, and Walker saw her off and kissed her. When she returned from that trip, they had sex for the first time, Joosten said.
“She, at the time, was in a difficult situation,” Joosten said. “She had limited financial means. She had left the relationship with her former partner. She needed somewhere to stay, and Mr Walker had said that he wanted her to live in a self-contained unit on his mother’s property.”
She moved into that property around July 2014, the tribunal heard, and their relationship continued until January 2017.
During the relationship, he sent her the personal treatment details of seven of his clients in emails that he wanted her to proofread, the tribunal heard. Walker said in his submissions to the tribunal that there were no identifying details about his clients in those emails.
Joosten told the tribunal that one of the emails in particular “drafted in relation to a client … does have information that may be able to lead to identification including of her appearance, her family, her diagnosis, her ex-husband and a range of matters … the information in there is of a private nature”.
“Even if couldn’t lead to identification, it shouldn’t be shared, particularly with someone not employed by Mr Walker,” Joosten said. “It’s inappropriate.”
The board alleged that Walker failed to maintain the boundaries between a psychologist and their client.
Joosten told the tribunal that even if the treatment relationship eventually ended, there were significant other power imbalances, including their age difference and the information he had about her mental health and personal situation.
“Power imbalances don’t disappear when Medicare billing ends,” Joosten said.
Even after the treatment relationship ended, correspondence provided to the tribunal revealed he continued to diagnose her and suggest treatments to her, Joosten said. The woman had provided photos, voicemails, emails and other documentary evidence to the tribunal.
“The board also relies … on communication and the emails sent at the conclusion of the relationship,” Joosten said. “These emails provide evidence of coercion. Mr Walker was using his psychological training at times to manipulate or coerce [the woman].”
When someone reported the relationship to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra), Walker and his mother asked the woman to send a letter to Ahpra denying everything, the tribunal heard.
Joosten said Walker had initially lied to Ahpra and the board about having a personal relationship with his client, telling investigators that it was a case of mistaken identity, that someone was trying to set him up, and that he had been receiving anonymous threatening correspondence.
He later “admitted he lied to Ahpra initially when he denied the relationship”, she said. He also went on to acknowledge the relationship was inappropriate, the tribunal heard.
“There are admissions in that he accepts there was a personal relationship and he accepts the general terms around when it commenced, which was very close in time to when the treating relationship was coming to an end,” Joosten said.
Joosten said it was the board’s submission that Walker tried to influence and interfere with Ahpra’s investigation. The tribunal was presented with a letter sent by Walker to the woman in relation to an unrelated separate civil case the pair were involved in. In that letter, Walker told the woman that if she withdrew her statement to Ahpra, it would result in a settlement of the unrelated civil proceeding.
Joosten said in his submissions, Walker denied any of his or his mother’s contact with the woman was an attempt to interfere with the investigation.
Joosten told the tribunal that when young people seek mental health help for the first time, it is a particularly vulnerable time for them.
In the woman’s case, she had recently moved to Victoria, she was isolated, had limited finances and was dealing with significant trauma when she first sought treatment from Walker.
“Young people, particularly of a similar age to [the woman], are entitled to go to these practitioners … to go to a psychologist, expecting that they be treated without ulterior motive,” she said.
Joosten said Walker had demonstrated “limited insight” into his actions.
The board submitted to Vcat that Walker, who has been suspended from practising as a psychologist since the investigation began, should be reprimanded, disqualified from applying for registration as a health practitioner for a further five years, and be prohibited from directly or indirectly providing any health services whether as an employee, a contractor, a manager or volunteer.
The board was concerned Walker may attempt to work as a counsellor or in some other unregulated mental health field, Joosten said.
“This conduct … is prolonged,” she said. “It’s repeated. It’s multifaceted. It involves elements of dishonesty, and Mr Walker has demonstrated disregard for the regulator in providing false and misleading information in the investigation. It’s important that the tribunal sends a clear message to practitioners that this type of conduct cannot be tolerated.”
Before the tribunal adjourned to consider its decision, to be delivered at a later date, the Vcat senior member John Billings addressed the woman directly, who was not required to give evidence but who chose to attend as an observer.
Even though she was not required to undergo cross-examination, “we imagine even as an observer it would not have been an easy morning for her at all,” Billings said.
“We are conscious that the matter has been hanging over a number of people, including [the young woman], for a considerable period of time.”
Do you know more? melissa.davey@theguardian.com
