Our expert says:
Maybe he was legally advised as to what he should or should not deny, but it really doesn't sound as though any professional ethical intelligence was applied to your complaint at any stage. Anyone who thinks that "communicating" physical feelings would be problematic but that expressing emotional or flirtatious feelings would not, was or is ethically illiterate.
Sadly, your problems so clearly illustrate just why it was all wrong, and why such conduct is not allowed professionally. And it was wholly HIS responsibility and job to recognize all this very early on, and to avoid any problems arising from it, and indeed to use its earliest elements to your benefit therapeutically. That was the expertise he claimed to have and was expected to have - it was not your job to deal with that or recognize it, however intuitive you are ( and I'm sure you're formidably intuitive).
I may have reasonably good legal intuitions, but if I consulted you on a legal matter, I would expect to be able to rely on your judgement and expertise, and to rely on you not to use your recognition of my legal vulnerabilities to create a legal trap for me that would benefit you and not me.
And if you then used the structural and inescapable elements of legal consultation and representation to persuade me or encourage me to blame myself for whatever went wrong, you would be skilfully using your expertise for your own benefit and not mine. And within a legal situation neither your feelings nor mine would uually be part of the equation or part of the currency within which we were working.
From what I have heard about the story, your intuitions seem to have been proved accurate. Whether or not any of his feelings were sincere or insincere or exploitative, or any complex mix of those, is beside the point. Flirtation is always a mixture of emotional and physical emotions and interests - if he denies that there was any physical component to his feelings, intentions or actions, is totally self-serving and rather cynical.
OF course it would suit him to deny it, especially when being judged by other professionals not qualified to truly understand that the boundary violations and offenses were gross, and not mitigated by such a denial.
Indeed, his denial is best explained by one of the classic legal remarks. Way back in the 1960's there was a most notorious legal and political scandal, where a senior government minister had been dallying with a couple of young women of famously elastic morals and activities, and one of those implicated was announced to have denied that anything improper had happened. One of the young women, Mandy Rice-Davies famously retorted " Well, he would, wouldn't he ?"
The information provided does not constitute a diagnosis of your condition. You should consult a medical practitioner or other appropriate health care professional for a physical exmanication, diagnosis and formal
advice. Health24 and the expert accept no responsibility or liability for any damage or personal harm you may suffer resulting from making use of this content.