The Proof‎ > ‎

Exhibit A

I will start off with this example as it is simple and pretty much speaks for itself. I made a complaint to the ACC Complaints Department where apparently issues are resolved. The result of my complaint was essentially a long blurb telling me how wrong I was and how right ACC is. Rather than indulge in the tedium of a blow by blow rebuttal I will focus on the Complaints Investigators use of a medical report. 

Clinical Psychologist Dr White wrote a report that had this statement. 

“Following my meeting with Alex on the 14th January, I understand that there have been some issues and differences of opinion with ACC arising in respect of his rehabilitation process and the specific tasks required at this point.  I understand that he has instigated a complaint process and is seeking to reach an agreement regarding the rehabilitation pathway. As such, we agreed that we would not undertake further sessions to continue with the therapy goals at this time.  Such work entails a significant degree of vulnerability for Alex in which there are associated risks.  The current uncertainty and differences of opinion regarding the rehabilitation process are highly likely to negatively impact on such work. I do not feel that it is clinically indicated or safe to proceed until there has been a resolution to this issue and clarity regarding future therapy sessions has been reached.  I am writing to request further sessions in order to continue the treatment goals we have commenced. However, such sessions should only resume once there has been some clarity and agreement regarding the next steps in the rehabilitation process.” 

"I previously recommended that Alex be referred for psychiatric assessment with regards to further assessment of mental state and risk in respect of his clinical treatment. I understand that Alex has undertaken this assessment with Dr Blue and recommendations regarding ongoing psychological therapy and possible pharmacological treatments were made."

The Complaints Investigator states in regard to this 

“Your file indicates a psychiatric assessment is overdue. It is evident that Ms White does not feel she is able to complete therapy with you, particularly while you are adversarial in your approach to ACC" and 

“However I accept ACC’s position that a Psychiatric assessment may assist with establishing a more effective treatment and rehabilitation plan. Your Psychologist has recommended this assessment in her latest treatment report. In my view it is reasonable to enforce such an assessment in these circumstances, as indicated in the draft IRP.”



Now it appears to me that the Complaints Investigator is not accurately reporting on what Dr White says. Observe how ACC misuses a Clinical Psychology report. Dr White refers to her previous recommendation and that she understands an assessment took place, because I was assessed (privately) by Psychiatrist Dr Blue. However the Complaints Investigator specifically states that my Psychologist has recommended an assessment. Interesting. I can see no concern expressed by Dr White that I am being "adversarial" yet that is the conclusion a reasonable person would reach if they did not have the benefit of having the actual report in their possession (as I did). 

Comments