Sandra Gardener faced allegations relating to a child protection case she was working on in November 2004, when a child was taken into care following suspicions that her mother was suffering from Munchausen’s by proxy (fabrication or induction of illness in another).

The committee heard that Gardener did not seek advice from a paediatrician about whether there was evidence of Munchausen’s by proxy when suspicions were first raised, or prior to making the application for the Emergency Protection Order that led to the child being placed into care. The child was in care for over a year, before a High Court decision saw her returned to her parents.

The committee found all but one of the allegations to be proved but concluded that Gardener had not committed misconduct, which is defined by the GSCC as conduct which calls into question someone’s suitability to remain on the Social Care Register. Whilst the committee noted that Gardener was one of the social workers who concluded an Emergency Protection Order should be made, they said that she was not the driving force behind the application. They also decided that, given that Gardener’s manager and the hospital did not suggest an alternative course than to take the child in care, the fact that she carried out the order does not call into question her suitability to remain on the register.

Rosie Varley, Chair of the GSCC, said: “In order to fulfil our role as regulator of the workforce, we need to assess all complaints that come our way about the conduct of a Registered Social Worker. Where we have established that there could be a case to answer, we put those concerns in front of an independent panel. It is quite right that such cases are assessed and we respect the decision of the committee. We need to ensure that all registered social workers are adhering to the code and guidelines.”