A female psychologist in South Australia who began a relationship with a police officer client has denied any intent to deceive the Psychology Board about the timing of their relationship.
Dr Samantha Angelakis, 36, was found by a tribunal to have fallen significantly below the professional standards after she eventually married the client.
However, during an appeal hearing, her legal counsel argued that Dr Angelakis’ state of mind at the time of her self-reporting of the relationship should have been evaluated from a subjective perspective.
In a decision published online in July, the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT) found Dr Angelakis guilty of unprofessional conduct on four counts. At the time, Dr Angelakis was a clinical psychologist at PsychMed, specialising in trauma recovery through cognitive behavioural therapy.
Craig Arthur, an Inspector with the South Australia Police, was referred to Dr Angelakis in 2019 for treatment related to work-related post-traumatic stress disorder.
From April 17 to July 19, 2019, Insp. Arthur underwent treatment with Dr Angelakis. The tribunal noted that professional boundaries began to blur starting June 11, 2019, with a noticeable change in the nature and tone of their email correspondence by July 8, 2019.
It was agreed by both parties that on July 20, 2019, they met and spent several hours together, during which they kissed and held each other. Six days later, they had sexual intercourse for the first time.
Both Dr Angelakis and Insp. Arthur reportedly separated from their respective spouses on July 19, 2019, and later married in January 2021.
Dr Angelakis self-reported the relationship to the Psychology Board of Australia on February 7, 2020, leading to a referral to the Tribunal.
According to the Code of Ethics, psychologists are prohibited from engaging in sexual relationships with former clients within two years of terminating the professional relationship.
The tribunal found that Dr Angelakis also engaged in professional misconduct by misleading the Board to suggest that no inappropriate conduct occurred during the treatment period.
During the appeal hearing, Dr Angelakis’ counsel challenged the tribunal’s findings, arguing that it had misinterpreted her state of mind, which should have been assessed subjectively rather than objectively. They emphasised that Dr Angelakis had no intention to deceive the Board.
Her legal team further argued that Dr Angelakis did not have access to her emails with Insp. Arthur at the time of her self-report, and therefore may not have fully appreciated how quickly her feelings had evolved in July 2019.
“The tribunal failed to engage with her evidence about a lack of recollection in the absence of the emails,” counsel said.
Counsel representing the Psychology Board stressed that the professional relationship between a psychologist and a client must remain strictly therapeutic, as outlined in the code.
“Of course, the board is proceeding on objective evidence, given the documents,” they noted.
The final decision has yet to be delivered.
Source: The Advertiser.
