Vera Mercier

In a professional discipline proceeding, the panel found professional misconduct based on admitted boundary crossings with a vulnerable former client in an addiction treatment context, including an intimate and sexual relationship shortly after the counselling relationship, receipt of private aftercare fees, and misuse of a protected professional title before registration.

The panel held that the misconduct reflected on current suitability to practise and supported jurisdiction even though some conduct predated registration.

Applying the public-interest approach to joint penalty submissions, the panel accepted a jointly proposed order imposing a reprimand, revocation, a five-year prohibition on re-application, publication, and costs.

The panel emphasized public protection, deterrence, abuse of trust, and the seriousness of title misuse.

In a professional discipline proceeding, the panel found professional misconduct arising from an instructor-registrant’s boundary violations with students and a supervisee who were also clients.

The admitted facts established repeated personal disclosures in class, requests for loans and rides, exploitation of information obtained through the professional relationship, and conflicts of interest contrary to the governing statute, regulation, and standards of practice.

The panel held the conduct was dishonourable and unprofessional, though not disgraceful in light of confidential health-related mitigating circumstances.

It accepted a joint submission on penalty as consistent with the public interest, ordering a reprimand, a conditional four-month suspension tied to any future reactivation, remedial training and supervision terms, publication, and $1,000 in costs.