Social Media


Friday, 02 February 2018

Merthyr Tydfil care worker removed from Register for placing young people at risk

Written by The Editorial Team

A residential child care worker from Merthyr Tydfil has been removed from the Register of Social Care Workers in Wales after a hearing found his fitness to practise was impaired.

Barrie John Gilby was accused of failing to follow a child’s care plan by allowing unsupervised contact between the child and the child’s family.

The hearing was told that the child’s family took the child on a shopping trip in December 2016, which Mr Gilby failed to prevent, even though the child’s care plan stated the child wasn’t to have unsupervised contact with his family.

When the child didn’t return, Mr Gilby failed to promptly notify the home, the local authority and the police, and then failed to follow the instructions he received from his manager to try to resolve the matter.

The hearing was also told about other occasions where Mr Gilby failed to follow the instructions from his management. In one incident, he drove a child to the Fairwater area of Cardiff, despite being told not to go there because of the risk of the child absconding. The child then absconded.

On another occasion, he failed to supervise a child in school and left the premises despite instructions not to do so. The headteacher had to ask Mr Gilby to return to the school to remove the child after he damaged property and threatened staff.

Mr Gilby also sent an abusive text to his manager using inappropriate language and submitted a timesheet claiming for hours he hadn’t worked.

Following a three-day hearing in Cardiff last week, the committee decided that Mr Gilby’s fitness to practise was impaired because of his serious misconduct, which put vulnerable young people at risk of harm.

Explaining its decision, the committee said: “We found no evidence to suggest that Mr. Gilby has learned from previous errors and incidents where he has demonstrated poor judgement.

“As such, we are of the view that the quality of Mr. Gilby’s decision making is still in question. There’s no evidence that Mr. Gilby has undertaken any learning or reflection, or developed a better understanding of his role as a residential child care worker.

The committee decided to remove Mr Gilby from the Register, saying: “We are of the view that only a Removal Order will be adequate in this case… to ensure public confidence in the process and the social care profession, and… [to] adequately protect the public and, in particular, vulnerable young people.”