Tribunal decision – Matkovich (SWCDT 26/25P)

Andrea Coulston

2 days ago

This case concerns a social worker, Carrie Anne Matkovich, who wrote an unauthorised character reference for a client, misled the Department of Corrections into believing a course existed when it did not, and used that false information to obtain repeated exceptions to the client’s electronically monitored bail conditions.

The social worker was engaging with individuals to provide an initiative with a mental health focus without any professional oversight or supervision, and in circumstances where she was only newly registered and subject to ongoing supervision requirements.

The Tribunal found that she had acted outside the limits of safe, supervised practice as a newly registered social worker.

Her deception involved both her employer and a government department, undermined the integrity of bail monitoring and blurred professional boundaries with a client. Her inappropriate conduct brought discredit to the social work profession and also raised questions on her fitness to practise as a social worker.

The Tribunal considered the dishonesty particularly serious and found that this conduct amounted to professional misconduct.

The Tribunal found several breaches of the Code

Principle 1: Act with integrity and honesty

1.1: Act honestly and ethically in all personal and professional behaviour.
1.3: Be responsible for your own actions and decisions.
1.4: Be reliable, dependable, and trustworthy.
1.5: Communicate in an appropriate, open, accurate, and straightforward way.

Given her lack of transparency with her employer, the social worker did not behave professionally nor act honestly, ethically and in keeping with the position of trust that registration as a social worker affords.

Principle 4: Be competent and responsible for your professional development

4.2: Work in accordance with the law.

4.3: Work in a safe way.

4.8: Know and work within the limits of your own practice and seek supervision and guidance where necessary.

The Tribunal found that as a newly qualified social worker she acted outside of the limits of her practice and failed to seek appropriate guidance.

Principle 6: Strive to establish and maintain the trust and confidence of clients

6.2: Behave in a professional manner.

6.3: Never abuse the client’s trust.

6.6 recognise, understand, and honour a client’s right to make informed choices and give informed consent to any service or treatment they receive, except where any enactment or the common law provides otherwise

The Tribunal found that her conduct was a breach of the client’s trust, as he was unaware that the approval for the exception to his bail was granted on false grounds. That he was arrested and required to appear in court was a significant adverse consequence of the social worker’s actions.

Principle 9: Maintain public trust and confidence in the social work profession

9.1: Maintain a high standard of professional and personal behaviour – avoid activities, work, or non-work that may in any way bring the social work profession into disrepute; the same standards of conduct are expected when using social media and electronic forms of communication.
9.4: Protect yourself and other people from unnecessary risk.
9.6: Work cooperatively with, and be honest, open, and constructive in your dealings with managers, employers, the SWRB, and other authorities.

The social worker’s misrepresentations to Corrections in this case were of particular concern, as she knew or ought to have known that authorisation to attend the course would not be granted if accurate information was provided.

These misrepresentations undermined the integrity of the court-imposed bail conditions. The purposes of bail conditions are to minimise the risk that may be posed by a person facing a criminal charge, in this case, a charge of family violence.

Her actions meant that a person facing family violence charges was allowed absences from his EM bail address for a fictitious course, without any formal oversight or supervision as would generally, be required for those on EM bail attending rehabilitative courses or programmes.

The social worker’s actions were inconsistent with the expectations of a social worker to work in accordance with the law and to work in a safe way.

On penalty, the Tribunal imposed censure, cancellation of registration, substantial costs orders in favour of both the PCC and the Tribunal, and permanent suppression of the client’s identity. It said the conduct was deliberate, dishonest, ongoing, and potentially harmful, and that suspension would not have been sufficient.

This case highlights the importance of safe practise, maintaining the trust of the client and adhering to a high standard of professional and personal behaviour:

Know and work within the limits of your own practice and seeking supervision and guidance where necessary.
Never abuse the client’s trust.
Work cooperatively with, and be honest, open, and constructive in your dealings with managers, employers, the SWRB, and other authorities.

Questions for reflection

When I feel pulled to bend a rule for a particular client, what does that pull tell me about them, about me, about what the rule is for?
When doing the right thing feels like letting a client down, what helps me recognise it as the right thing anyway?
When I am out of my depth, what makes asking for help harder than it should be? Who would I go to for help?

Raise concerns about a social worker’s behaviour with us

You can raise a concern with us about a social worker’s behaviour by completing our online concerns and complaints form.

Employers are expected to address any breaches of the Code of Conduct by a social worker they employ but, when the misconduct is deemed serious, employers must report it to the SWRB. If a social worker leaves their employment during a complaint or competence concern investigation the matter must be reported to the SWRB.

Mandatory reporting by employers