Professional Conduct notice / PR

January 2025: Petar Rodic, Reference No 00737775 , Registrant ID 183449

Outcome Details

This outcome was reached by agreement.

Reasons

Petar Rodic, a 麻豆原创 individual member, agrees to the following outcome of the investigation into a complaint of failure to comply with professional standards under reference PCP[鈥.

1. Background

1.1 [鈥, the Complainant, complains about Mr Petar Rodic, an accredited 麻豆原创 member, (the Member), after the Complainant received a consultation session with the Member on 13th January Year 1 and subsequently booked further sessions.

1.2 The Complainant organised a consultation meeting with the Member which took place on 13th January Year 1; this meeting lasted fifteen minutes. In this meeting the Member advised the Complainant that he (the Complainant) should start to feel a change after six sessions. The Complainant had a first session with the Member on the 18th January Year 1.

1.3 The Member advised the Complainant to book further sessions; the Complainant did so. The Member encouraged the Complainant to book a block number of sessions and stated that if he booked ten sessions he would receive a discount of 拢100.

1.4 The Complainant received an invoice for 拢800. The Complainant advised the Member that due to his [鈥 would be unable to pay this as money [鈥. It was agreed that the Complainant would pay 拢400 for 3 sessions.

1.5 A session was arranged for 09:00am on 25th January Year 1 by email from the Member to the Complainant on 23 January Year 1 timed at 12.53 and confirmed with the Complainant by the Member by email later on 24 January Year 1 at 20.16 following the Complainant notifying the Member of his reduced payment. Two hours after the second email, at 22.09, the Member sent a further email to the Complainant stating that upon reflection he had decided not to proceed with the session that was booked for the next morning, that he was 鈥榝ull at present鈥� and wished the Complainant luck with finding a therapist in the future.

1.6 The Complainant enquired by email on 25 January Year 1 about the Member鈥檚 complaints procedure and stated in an email the following day why he was not happy with the Member鈥檚 conduct.

1.7 The Member responded by informing the Complainant about 麻豆原创鈥檚 complaints procedure and in a further email that day stated that the purpose of a consultation was an 鈥榦pportunity to assess鈥� whether they want to work together.

2. Admissions

2.1 Petar Rodic makes the following admissions which the 麻豆原创 accepts:

Allegation 1

1.1 At 22.10 on 24 January Year 1, approximately 2 hours after confirming with the Complainant by email timed at 20.16 that there would be a session the following day at 09.00 and/or having accepted and/or agreed payment from the Complainant for future sessions, the Member:

(a) cancelled the session arranged for the following morning and/or

(b) terminated the therapeutic relationship between the parties stating 鈥業 am full at present鈥�

1.2 The Member thereby failed to meet professional standards, including in particular by acting in a way which was inconsistent with paragraphs 39 and/or 43 of鈥� Good Practice 鈥檌n the Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions 2018 which state:

39: We will endeavour to inform clients well in advance of approaching endings and be sensitive to our client鈥檚 expectations and concerns when we are approaching the end of our work together, and/or

43: We will maintain high standards of honesty and probity in all aspects of our work.

Allegation 2

2.1 The Member failed to contract adequately in sufficient detail or at all with the Complainant for the provision of his professional services to the Complainant.

2.2 The Member thereby failed to meet professional standards, including in particular by acting in a way which was inconsistent with paragraphs 31 a. and or 31 b. and/or 31 d. of 鈥楪ood Practice 鈥檌n the Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions 2018 which state:

31: We will give careful consideration to how we reach agreement with clients and will contract with them about the terms on which our services will be provided. Attention will be given to:
a. reaching an agreement or contract that takes account of each client鈥檚 expressed needs and choices so far as possible, and/or
b. communicating terms and conditions of the agreement or contract in ways easily understood by the client and appropriate to their context and/or
d. providing the client with a record or easy access to a record of what has been agreed

3. Mitigation

3.1. Petar Rodic puts forward the following mitigation which has been taken into account by the IAC in deciding the appropriate outcome. In summary he states:

3.2 He sincerely apologises for the misunderstanding during the Consultation-Assessment session and for the confusion about how the parties would proceed with the next steps. He also acknowledges the 鈥渁bruptness鈥� of his previous email and the way he communicated to the client.

3.3 He realises 鈥渙n reflection鈥� that he would not be the best fit for the client as a counsellor.

3.4 He notes that his comment about being 鈥渇ull鈥� was a reflection of his personal capacity rather than the practices necessary to provide the best support to the client. He recognises that his communication was not as clear as it could have been and this had led to confusion and upset for the client.

3.5 It was never his intention to cause any harm or distress, and he was truly sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused. He also realises that his response to the client 鈥渕ay have been reactive鈥� and he 鈥渉umbly apologised鈥� for any distress this may have caused.

3.6 He would continue to use part of his supervision time to reflect on this matter, exploring his self-care and 鈥淲indow of Tolerance鈥�. He would also be exploring client attachment and how for some the therapy begins before the relationship is already established. The question of how he responds if, after the initial consultation- assessment, it becomes clear that he is not the appropriate therapist for the client will also be a focus of supervision.

4. Conclusion

4.1 The issues identified and admitted by Petar Rodic amounted to breaches of the Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling and Psychotherapy 2018.

4.2. One of the aims of the Professional Conduct Procedure is to protect members of the public. The IAC, in considering what sanction may be appropriate in the circumstances of this case, have taken into account the interests of public protection.

4.3 In relation to the findings above, the Committee considers it appropriate that the Member should within 3 months of receipt of this letter complete the following:

1. (a) Undertake not less than 6 hours of CPD on Managing client expectations and Client contracting and Appropriate endings

b) submit a list of CPD undertaken and provide evidence of the same

c) provide a copy of his new client contract that incorporates the learning from his completed CPD and the requirements of the Ethical Framework (2018)

2. provide to the 麻豆原创 a reflective piece setting out:

a) what went wrong in this case and the impact of this on the client
b) what changes he has made to his practice in light of this learning, specifically in relation to contracting, and the initial assessment.

3. On completion of the above, to provide a genuine and sincere letter of apology addressed to the Complainant acknowledging the impact of the Member鈥檚 actions on the Complainant.

4. The Member is required to confirm discussion of the above points with his supervisor.

4.4 The Member agrees that this Agreement will be published by the 麻豆原创 in line with the Publication Policy and that this Agreement will be disclosed to the Complainant.

4.5 The Member agrees that he will not act in any way inconsistent with this Agreement such as, for example, by denying the findings in paragraph 2 above.

4.6 If the Member fails without good reason to comply with the sanction set out above or acts in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement the matter will be referred to a sanction panel for consideration. The decision of the sanction panel may be published.

4.7 If the Member acts in a way which is inconsistent with this Agreement a sanction panel may determine that it will terminate his membership. Such a decision will be published.

(Where ellipses [ . . . ] are displayed, they indicate an omission of text)