Care home manager who failed needs of highly vulnerable resident removed from Register
An adult care home manager from Pontypool has been removed from the Register of Social Care Workers after a Social Care Wales hearing found his fitness to practise was impaired.
The hearing heard that Christopher Price bullied and harassed staff at the adult care home and failed to meet the needs of a highly vulnerable resident with autism.
Mr Price did not attend the three-day hearing at Social Care Wales’s Cardiff office, but four support workers who worked with Mr Price attended and gave evidence.
The committee heard that between January and November 2014 Mr Price bullied and harassed staff, and behaved inappropriately towards certain staff members.
One witness said he was intimidated by Mr Price and that Mr Price belittled him and undermined his authority. Witnesses also described how Mr Price occasionally used abusive language.
The hearing heard that Mr Price failed to provide clear guidance for staff about dealing with a vulnerable resident with autism and didn’t pass relevant information about the resident onto staff.
Mr Price also didn’t allow staff to pass on information about the resident to outside professionals and even instructed one member of staff to remove and destroy information about the resident self-harming.
After hearing the evidence, the committee concluded that Mr Price’s fitness to practise was impaired due to his misconduct and lack of competence, and that he should be removed from the Register.
Explaining its decision, the committee said: “We noted that there was no evidence that Mr Price had accepted his responsibility for his actions.
“Nor was there evidence that he had shown remorse, that he had reflected on his actions or that he was committed to addressing the impairment of his fitness to practise. Mr Price’s actions and omissions caused harm to Person A.
“He was dishonest and he showed serious disregard for the Code of Practice for Social Care Workers and the Practice Guidance for Social Care Managers. Mr Price has not cooperated in any meaningful way with these proceedings.”
The committee summed up its decision by saying: “We decided that a Removal Order was the only appropriate sanction.
“We consider it to be proportionate in view of the serious nature of Mr Price’s dishonesty and we believe that this order is necessary to protect the public and to safeguard public confidence in social care services.”
