A support worker nipped an agitated patient on the arm during an argument in an Ayr care home.
But Chelsea Carruthers then applied for other care sector jobs- while knowing she was subject to a suspension order.
Her career in the care industry this week came to an end after she was struck off the register by the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC).
The organisation held an investigation into the allegations, which date back to March 2019 and February this year, and Carruthers was found guilty of misconduct.
In an 11-page dossier, the SSSC said the incident with the patient, known only as ‘AA,’ arose at an unnamed care home in Ayr, which is operated by West Coast Care Ltd.
According to the report the patient was “agitated” and told Carruthers: “You had no right to be here” but Carruthers replied: “You have no right to be here.”
The patient then hit out at Carruthers’ arm, but she “retaliated” by nipping the skin of her arm between her fingers.
A co-worker was said to have been “shocked” by the Carruthers’ behaviour.
The SSSC said: “The Panel found on the balance of probabilities that you (Carruthers) did respond to AA’s comment in the way described.
"And, given the bickering between you and AA, it was quite likely that you responded in a ‘tit for tat’ fashion.
"The Panel also found on a balance of probabilities that you did nip AA when she lashed out at you with her arm.”
Carruthers was also alleged to have made applications for employment with an operator in Ayr- and with an agency- when she knew, or “reasonably ought to have known” that this was a role requiring registration- from which she was suspended from.
The SSSC labelled her actions “dishonest.”
Their judgement said: “The Panel came to the conclusion that the ordinary, decent person would consider your (Carruthers) misrepresentations in an attempt to gain employment in registrable employment when you were not eligible to work with vulnerable people to be dishonest.
"In applying for employment in the social services sector, when you knew you should not be working in that sector, the Panel concluded there was a pattern of dishonest behaviour, which was concerning.
“The public would be very concerned that a registered worker who has been suspended from the Register pending an investigation into her conduct, felt they could try and circumvent the SSSC by telling the employer that she was eligible to work.”
In conclusion, the SSSC said: “A Removal Order is the most appropriate sanction as it is both necessary and justified in the public interest.”
