Carer fails to have her ban overturned

Council worker struck off for failing vulnerable children

A social worker struck off for failing 22 vulnerable children has failed in an audacious bid to be reinstated.

Mhairi Thomson was banned from practicing when a watchdog found serious failings with her work.

But she spent a year fighting the panel’s decision to score her from its register.

The Scottish Social Services Council insists its original ruling will stand.

A tribunal report stated: “Social service workers who abuse the trust which society places in them should lose the privilege that comes with registration.

“It was the view of the panel that your behaviour and attitude render you unfit to be a member of a caring and responsible profession.

“Given the admissions, the findings in fact, your limited insight and the absence of any reflection or regret, it was the view of the panel that it was appropriate to impose a removal order.”

Thomson worke d for Renfrewshire Council when she repeatedly put children at risk.

Among them were two sisters who claimed they had been sexually abused by their mum’s partner.

Thomson also failed to help two youngsters abandoned by their mother due to her “chaotic, alcoholic life”.

She racked up a catalogue of breaches while working with Renfrewshire Council between March 2013 and January 2015.

The worker was hammered by bosses after a slew of allegations were flagged-up.

But disciplinary panel chiefs ruled she had taken “no steps to address the deficiencies” in her care.

Bosses barred her from the industry after warning she “made no apology” for her actions.

A tribunal report stated: “You sought to blame others for your deficient professional practice and you accepted limited personal responsibility.”

Thomson was sacked by Renfrewshire Council after allegations of care breaches first came to light.

She was rehired as a nonregistered worker for a drug support project despite an internal probe taking place.

The former social worker launched her failed bid against the decision last October.

The hearing report continued: “The panel acknowledged that a removal order can have financial and reputational consequences for a worker.

“In any event, it was the view of the panel that any such consequences for you are outweighed by the need to protect members of the public, to serve the wider public interest, to protect the integrity of the register and the reputation of the regulator.”