1. The Respondent (Mr Huson) is a registered psychologist carrying on practice in the Gippsland area of regional Victoria.
2. In September and October 2010 two notifications about Mr Huson's conduct were received by AHPRA.
3. The notifications were made by Ms C, a rehabilitation consultant, on behalf of two patients who had been referred by her to Mr Huson.
4. Patient W
5. Patient W was referred to Mr Huson by Ms C for treatment for depression and anxiety. She had experienced a recent marriage breakdown and was experiencing the effects of a recent move to an area of Victoria where she had no friends or family close by.
6. Patient W attended a total of three appointments with Mr Huson on 17 August 2010, 7 September 2010 and 14 September 2010.
7. By reason of her depression and anxiety, patient W was vulnerable and required the assistance of a psychologist who was able to maintain appropriate personal and physical boundaries.
8. During the session on 7 September 2010 patient W became emotional and cried as she recounted events in her life. At the conclusion of the session Mr Huson hugged patient W. Patient W did not wish to hug Mr Huson and felt uncomfortable but compelled to accept the hug.
9. During the third and final session on 14 September 2010 Mr Huson made personal comments to patient W about his feelings for her and his wish that they have contact outside of the therapeutic relationship.
10. In particular, Mr Huson:

(a) told patient W that he was attracted to her; and

(b) asked patient W if she would go for a coffee or a meal with him, saying that if she did not wish to do so while she was his patient, perhaps she would do so after she had completed her treatment.

1. Patient W felt scared and worried by Mr Huson's comments.
2. At the conclusion of the consultant Mr Huson again hugged patient W in circumstances in which patient W felt uncomfortable and unwilling to be hugged. A further appointment was scheduled for Patient W which she did not keep.
3. On 16 September 2010 patient W told Ms C about Mr Huson's conduct. Ms C then made a notification to the Board.

1. Patient E was referred to Mr Huson by Ms C for assistance in pain management of a spinal injury.
2. Mr Huson saw patient E for a total of 13 sessions between 7 April 2010 and 8 September 2010.
3. During those sessions patient E disclosed details of past medical and psychological problems, including a diagnosis of bi-polar disorder and a history of sexual abuse.
4. By reason of her physical and psychological conditions patient E was vulnerable and required the assistance of a psychologist who was able to maintain appropriate personal and physical boundaries.
5. On 21 April 2010 during their third session Mr Huson told patient E that she reminded him of a woman, now deceased, whom he had cared for deeply.
6. On at least one occasion during the sessions Mr Huson told patient E that she was his favourite patient and compared her favourably to another patient, saying he had looked forward to seeing her.
7. On 4 August 2010 at the end of the session Mr Huson hugged patient E and a peck on the lips occurred. Patient E felt confused and uncomfortable after the session.
8. On 8 September 2010 at the end of the session Mr Huson embraced patient E and complimented her on her perfume. Kissing occurred. Patient E was panicky and anxious as a result of what had occurred. She avoided future scheduled sessions with Mr Huson.
9. On 12 October 2010 patient E told Ms C about Mr Huson's conduct. Ms C then made a notification to the Board.

1. In 2010 Mr Huson was experiencing marital and financial difficulties. As a result of the ending of his marriage, he had become depressed and was in poor physical and psychological health.
2. Accordingly, his capacity to practise as a psychologist was impaired during the time he was treating patient W and patient E.
3. Mr Huson should have, but failed to, recognise that that his own depression rendered him unfit to practice and required him to cease practising until such time as he had recovered.
4. Since the time in which he was treating patient W and patient E, Mr Huson has participated in regular counselling sessions which have assisted him to return to good psychological health**.**

1. As a result of notifications received by AHPRA concerning both patient W and patient E, the Immediate Action Committee of the Board (the IAC) took immediate action against Mr Huson under section 156 of the National Law.
2. On 21 October 2010, the IAC determined to take immediate action by suspending his registration.
3. On 26 April 2012, the IAC determined to take further immediate action with respect to Mr Huson. The IAC determined that the appropriate immediate action would be to permit Mr Huson to re-register as a psychologist, but to require him to enter into an undertaking which required him to submit to professional supervision and attend counselling.
4. Mr Huson agreed to and signed the undertaking on 26 April 2012 and was re-registered as a psychologist on 2 May 2012.
5. The period during which Mr Huson was suspended was from 25 October 2010 to 2 May 2012.
6. Since being re-registered on 2 May 2012, Mr Huson has complied with the requirement that he undergo professional supervision and attend counselling. Reports received from his supervisor indicate that there are presently no concerns regarding his fitness to, and standard of, practice as a psychologist.

1. On 7 September 2010 and 14 September 2010, Charles Martin Huson engaged in professional misconduct, as defined in paragraph (b) of the definition of professional misconduct in section 5 of the National Law, in that he transgressed the professional boundaries that should, and ordinarily do, exist between a psychologist and his or her client by:

(a) engaging in inappropriate physical contact with his patient, Patient W, during professional consultations; and

(b) making inappropriate comments of a personal and/or romantic nature to his patient, Patient W, during a professional consultation.

1. Between 7 April 2010 and 8 September 2010, Charles Martin Huson engaged in professional misconduct, as defined in paragraph (b) of the definition of professional misconduct in section 5 of the National Law, and professional misconduct as defined in paragraph (b) of section 3 of the HPRA in that he transgressed the professional boundaries that should, and ordinarily do, exist between a psychologist and his or her patient by:

(a) suggesting and engaging in inappropriate physical contact with his patient, Patient E, during professional consultations; and

(b) making inappropriate comments of a personal and/or romantic nature to his patient, Patient E, during professional consultations.

1. The description of events set out above is as agreed between the parties, as were the proposed findings and orders. The Tribunal considers that the findings follow the description of events and that the orders are appropriate in all circumstances.