LATEST ISSUES 9th September, 2026
Updated: 7 days ago
This is the second of three parts of my letter to William Rodway, Investigation Team
Manager - Investigations, Fitness to Practise at the Health and Care Professions Council sent on the 7th September, 2026.
( Updated 12th September, 2026 )
'ONGOING CONCERNS ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH
You stated
‘The ICP accepted that any misconduct finding would be limited by wider service and organisational failings,…’
The substantive misconduct issues occurred despite the wider service and organisational failings, not because of them. The misconduct issues were founded on the inappropriate service provision ie ‘art therapy’ instead of ‘parent work’ and what happened within the actual therapeutic relationship and during the Trust’s own internal investigation ie Sally Mungall conspiring with management and or actually lying to management.
A Conduct and Competence Panel would have questioned Sally Mungall and cross-examined ME on the details of wider service and organisational failings. A similar excuse was offered by the Association of Child Psychotherapists during the ‘fitness to practice’ investigation into my daughter’s psychotherapist at CAMHS. I rebutted the arguments offered into the defence of my daughter’s psychotherapist ( you should have the evidence of those rebuttals in my submissions ). I made compelling arguments proving substantive misconduct issues occurred despite the wider service and organisational failings, not because of them.
‘… noted that she had practised without concern for more than four years since the events,’
Practiced without concern with what patient cohort? Children and adolescents within the CAMHS setting or privately with all demographics?
‘… and found no realistic risk of repetition. As a result, the ICP determined that, even if misconduct could be established, there was no realistic prospect of proving that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was currently impaired, and therefore the matter should not proceed to a final hearing.’
Sally Mungall’s fitness to practice is likely to be impaired due to mental health issues and a potential trauma-inflicted personality disorder.
The fitness to practice complaint raised by me was not related to one isolated incident. My complaint about Sally Mungall identified patterns of behaviour over a long period of time across several domains of concern. Some of those concerns include
1) Sally Mungall failed in her responsibilities as ‘clinical lead to my daughter, Meg, and arrange transition to adult services by her 17.5 birthday latest, in accordance with internal protocol and NICE guidelines.
2) Sally Mungall delivered ‘art therapy’ instead of the remit of ‘parent work’
3) Sally Mungall abused me during ‘art therapy’, making unprofessional remarks and passive-aggressive comments. She even raised the abuse with me in session and asked for my opinion.
4) Sally Mungall confirmed she was intending to write a ‘big’ academic paper on me, likely for her own academic and professional advancement
5) Sally Mungall did not have the professional competence to manage my transference and allowed a blurring of boundaries, something she actually confessed to in her own Progress Notes
6) Sally Mungall lied to me, to my face at the end of my daughters ‘final review’.
7) Sally Mungall lied to her clinical and leadership cohorts within CAMHS about me.
8) Sally Mungall lied to clinical colleagues about me in the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, CRISIS , CMHT and Hampshire Police.
9) Sally Mungall organised an ‘Internal Safeguarding Meeting’ subject ME without my participation.
10) Sally Mungall oversaw covert meetings in an attempt to manage perception of me and to craft a narrative that protected her professional reputation by reputational destroying me. All of this happened in secret, behind my back. I was NEVER given an opportunity to challenge the veracity of any accusation made against me by Sally Mungall. I believe Sally Mungall was proactive in this.
11) Sally Mungall allowed a ‘risk’ assessment of me to be modified from ‘no risk to others’ to ‘MODERATE risk to others’ during a Professionals Meeting in Feb 2022 that she organised and chaired. This helped to further undermine my character. Sally Mungall could have intervened but she didn’t. She is even on record apparently confused as to how this modification happened. I believe she was being disingenuous.
12) Sally Mungall invited Hampshire Police to her home in Feb 2022 to raise concerns about me being a risk to her.
13) Sally Mungall had telephone conversations with Ian Whaite of CMHT and Weston Henry of CRISIS in Feb 2022 convincing them, or at least allowing them to believe that I was ‘stalking’ her. While he denied any responsibility, I secured a written apology from Ian Whaites for his part when I finally accessed my medical records from Southern Health after 15th June 2022 and saw the accusation recorded.
14) Sally Mungall made no attempt to appraise the awful and disgusting drawings I had made in ‘art therapy’ under her supervision. I collected those drawings. Packaged in an envelope, from a complete stranger at CAMHS. I opened the envelope half way home. The casual way in which those drawings had been folded and the total absence of any after care made me ill. I actually threw up on the pavement.
15) Sally Mungall allowed her manager Wanda Reynolds to believe I was harassing her at her home when in reality I had forwarded a document and letter to her private art therapy practice address as advertised on her own website. The document and letter were sent in accordance with advice offered in the ‘Standards of conduct, performance and ethics’ codified by you, the Health and Care Professions Council.
16) Sally Mungall reported me to Hampshire Police making unfounded claims including an accusation of ‘stalking’ instead of following Section 8 of the ‘Standards of conduct, performance and ethics’ codified by you, the Health and Care Professions Council.
This is not an isolated case of clinical negligence or abuse. This is no singular incident of impulse or careless mistake. This is evidence of premeditated action, considered and thoughtful planning, shaped by cynical calculation, bias and poor judgement.
I believe the evidence provided proves Sally Mungall acted dishonestly and unethically over a significant period of time, motivated by self-interest and the overriding concern to preserve her professional reputation and livelihood. She knew she was guilty of clinical abuse and professional impropriety but refused to be held accountable. Sally Mungall was in a position of privilege and power and used that position to pervert the course of justice by reframing the narrative, avoiding responsibility by turning me into a monster.
I am now certain that Sally Mungall was compromised by her own counter-transference, self-confessed by her in her own ‘Progress Notes’ (‘***** *******************’) written on the 2nd September, 2021 ie ‘Strong countertransference of feeling violated by the intrusiveness within the room’. I believe this counter-transference was mismanaged by Sally Mungall and not properly identified in supervision. I would go further and suggest that this ‘counter-transference’ is indicative of Sally Mungall’s OWN potential mental health issues. This should have been examined and cross-examined by the HCPC Health Panel.
I believe that children and adolescents would have been at risk and may continue to be at risk from Sally Mungall, especially boys. I do not think that children or adolescents will have or will have cognitive reasoning or critical-thinking abilities to recognise or rationalise that they might have been abused or are being abused.
I have been the beneficiary of FOUR therapists since my experience with Sally Mungall. The general consensus among those therapists was professionally critical of Sally Mungall’s therapeutic approach. The shared opinion was that Sally Mungall was reckless.
My own opinion, based on more than ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY accumulated hours of subsequent professional and competent therapeutic intervention is that Sally Mungall was motivated largely by revenge, malice and academic opportunism. I believe Sally Mungall is a closet misandrist.
I am in the process of compiling my own account of the ‘art therapy’ delivered by Sally Mungall under the title ‘A Theory of Everything’. That theory posits an evidence-based explanation behind those motivations. https://www.fourandtwentydeadcrows.com/post/just-caws-4-a-theory-of-everything-introduction '
...
Part Three to be published on the 11th September 2026
Comments