Hypnotherapist Sued For Sexual Abuse and Exploitation

HypnosisAustralia, November 2007

By Dr Tracie O'Keefe DCH, Clinical Hypnotherapist, Psychotherapist & Counsellor
Editorial Director of HypnosisAustralia Online.

The Sydney Morning Herald on the 31 October this year reported a case in progress at the Supreme Court where a hypnotherapist was accused of sexually assaulting a female client during hypnotic therapy. It was claimed the 50-year-old woman had been induced to have contact with the man's genitals and that he encouraged her to allow herself to be touched by him while she was in a trance-like state. Neither the therapist nor the woman could be named due to a gagging order by Justice Elizabeth Fullerton prohibiting the press from printing names.

The woman claimed she saw the therapist to help her cope with the breakdown of her marriage. She said during visualisation she was led into a euphoric state and the therapist then sexually abused her by getting her to touch his penis and telling her he was implanting positive energy while he was touching her breasts during the sessions. Using safe place imagery he led her to a relaxed false sense of safety before the abuse.

The woman disclosed information to the therapist about how she had previously been abused by her stepfather and grandfather. She claimed that the therapeutic process and being under hypnosis made her vulnerable and unable to give consent so the sexual contact construed abuse.

The woman who had been a teacher and disability worker said that with her background, in hindsight she should have been more alerted when he touched her, but because she was in a hypnotic state she was not so aware at the time. Such allegations if they proved to be true would mean the therapist was clearly in breach of professional and ethical guidelines, but there was not disclosure as to what professional associations he might have belonged to.

The woman was claiming unspecified damages for distress, loss of earnings capacity and because she felt she was permanently inhibited from entering into further relationships which may be of emotional and joint financial benefit to her. Her lawyers claim the woman was vulnerable to distress and the hypnotherapist, who also cannot be identified, owed her a duty not to sexually exploit her. Because she was under hypnosis she could not consent to the sexual acts, which constituted assault.

The case continues.

©HypnosisAustralia, November 2007