Orkney care as­sis­tant off regis­ter

Panel: Mankissed­ser­viceuser’shand

The Press and Journal (Inverness, Highlands, and Islands) - - LOCAL NEWS - BY RITA CAMP­BELL

A so­cial care as­sis­tant on Orkney who put his hands round a client’s neck and kissed a ser­vice user on the hand has been re­moved from the regis­ter for sup­port work­ers.

Ma­tus Hor­vath worked at St Peter’s House, Strom­ness, for Orkney Is­lands Coun­cil when the in­ci­dents took place be­tween 2015 and 2016.

It was also found that he told a col­league that “if you were struck off you would start killing peo­ple” or words to that ef­fect.

The Scot­tish So­cial Ser­vices Coun­cil (SSSC) yes­ter­day pub­lished the out­come of its fit­ness to prac­tise panel im­pair­ment hear­ing which took place through­out five days.

The panel con­cluded: “In all the cir­cum­stances a re­moval order was war­ranted. Your ac­tions had been se­ri­ous and de­lib­er­ate. Your be­hav­iour was a se­ri­ous de­par­ture from the stan­dards ex­pected in the code. You had failed to pro­vide an ac­cept­able level of care.”

The pub­lished de­ci­sion stated: “At the hear­ing, the panel de­cided that some of the al­le­ga­tions against you were proved, that your fit­ness to prac­tise is im­paired, and made the de­ci­sion to im­pose a re­moval order on your reg­is­tra­tion in the part

“Thep­anel foundthaty­our mis­con­duc­thad beense­ri­ous”

of the regis­ter for sup­port work­ers in a care home ser­vice for adults.”

The order comes into ef­fect on Novem­ber 25 or, if he ap­peals, once the ap­peal is de­ter­mined or aban­doned.

It was found that on or around May 31 last year he placed his hand’s around a ser­vice user’s neck and stated: “I told you it was next week you stupid woman” or words to that ef­fect.

He ad­mit­ted dur­ing a dif­fer­ent in­ci­dent, stroking her face and hav­ing told her she was “beau­ti­ful”. His ex­pla­na­tion was that his ac­tions had been in­no­cent and he had meant to cause no dis­tress.

Hor­vath ad­mit­ted telling an­other client that he loved her and would take her on a date, claim­ing his in­ten­tions were in­no­cent.

The SSSC con­cluded: “The panel found that your mis­con­duct had been se­ri­ous, al­beit there was no ev­i­dence that it had been com­mit­ted with ma­li­cious in­tent. How­ever you had be­haved with a sig­nif­i­cant el­e­ment of naivety and lack of in­sight as to the con­se­quences of your words and ac­tions on ser­vice users.

“It was also clear that your con­duct amounted to a pat­tern of be­hav­iour and that it had caused emo­tional dis­tress to ser­vice user BB and your col­league, YY.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.