A support worker filmed herself taunting and threatening a woman with a history of challenging behaviour.

She then shared the video with other people and described the woman as a “c**t” in a string of text messages.

A complaint was later filed with the service provider manager who labelled the matter “vexatious” and didn’t even bother watching the video.

The victim, known as Ms A, had been diagnosed with mild intellectual disability, with comorbid mental health conditions, which were further impacted by complex trauma.

She had a criminal history including wilful damage, threatening language, and assault and entered a residential service in 2021.

Her support worker, known as Ms C in a decision released today, took photos of Ms A and a video of her without consent and shared them inappropriately.

A woman known as Ms B, who was the support worker’s daughter, complained to the Health and Disability Commissioner (HDC) in 2023.

She raised concerns that her mother had been taunting Ms A and using disrespectful and demeaning language when describing her in text messages, such as calling her a “c**t”.

Taunting and threatening

According to Ms A, the video submitted to the HDC was filmed without her knowledge, and therefore without her consent.

The video showed Ms C verbally taunting Ms A, including threatening her that she was no longer her friend and that she was going to show the video to Ms B, who would be “disgusted”.

Ms A alleged that the support worker had on a previous occasion been verbally abusive, had attempted to restrain her, and had pulled her hair and filmed the incident on her phone.

Ms B said she approached Mrs D, a manager with the provider, with her concerns and alleged that she was laughed at and told to go to the police instead.

The provider stated the manager concerned denied having laughed at Ms B, but acknowledged that she had told her to contact the police.

The provider acknowledged that Mrs D did not follow its standard complaints resolution process.

The provider said it is unaware of when the photo and video were recorded and shared, adding it was concerning, and evident, the support worker had shared an image and recordings with people outside the organisation.

Internal investigation

It said upon receipt of Ms B’s complaint, the support worker was subject to an investigation. As a result of that process, she was no longer employed by the provider.

The provider acknowledged Ms A’s behaviour was escalating, and the staff did not use de-escalation techniques, as they should have.

“Of particular concern within the video provided were the actions by Ms C who made inappropriate, threatening-like comments to Ms A around people not being friends with her any longer. It appears Ms C also filmed and later shared that video recording. All these actions were against our policies.”

Multiple text messages showed profane language such as calling Ms A a "c..t" and other personal information related to her life. Photo / 123RF

The provider said that Mrs D was aware of the significant breakdown in relationship between Ms B and her mother, Ms C.

Mrs D did not view the video, and therefore did not treat the complaint with the seriousness that was warranted, leading her to perceive the complaint as vexatious.

Complaint should have been taken seriously

Deputy Health and Disability Commissioner Rose Wall said in her decision released today that the HDC had made numerous attempts to contact Ms C following the complaint. None were responded to.

Wall said she was concerned that Mrs D did not comply with the policy and process by telling Ms B to go to the police instead of accepting and processing the complaint.

“ I acknowledge that when Ms B raised her complaint, Mrs D was aware of the breakdown in relationship between Ms C and Ms B and thus felt that the complaint was vexatious.

“In my view, the reason for a complaint should not mean it is not taken seriously.”

Wall suggested that Mrs D reflect on the manner in which she dealt with the complaint and recommended that in future she record and report all complaints, regardless of whether or not she perceives them to be vexatious.

The decision said the complaint was serious and raised concerns about a support worker’s verbal maltreatment of a vulnerable consumer with dual disabilities and a history of challenging behaviour.

The support work breached the company’s information management policy by sharing the video and photo. She also failed to provide services to Ms A in accordance with professional standards.

“It is clear from the video recording that Ms C taunted and threatened Ms A and did not utilise Ms A’s behaviour support plan strategies to de-escalate the situation.

“I consider that Ms C’s conduct amounted to verbal abuse, as defined by the provider’s abuse and neglect policy. Therefore, I find that Ms C failed to treat Ms A with respect.”

It was recommended that Ms C provide a formal written apology to Ms A and that the apology be sent to the HDC, for forwarding to Ms A.

Wall recommended Ms C refamiliarise herself with the code of HDC consumer rights by reviewing it on the HDC website.

“In particular, Ms C should review (rights) which relate to consumers being treated with respect and dignity and the right to have services provided that comply with relevant standards.”

The investigation found that the provider did not breach the code.

“In this case, I consider that the failures were individual failures on the part of Ms C and to a lesser extent Mrs D, rather than deficient guidance or training, and therefore were not indicative of broader systems or organisational issues at the service.”

Al Williams is an Open Justice reporter for the New Zealand Herald, based in Christchurch. He has worked in daily and community titles in New Zealand and overseas for the last 16 years. Most recently he was editor of the Hauraki-Coromandel Post, based in Whangamatā. He was previously deputy editor of the Cook Islands News.