Physio at HSE centre allegedly stalked and sexually assaulted female colleague

A physiotherapist at a HSE centre in Tipperary allegedly sexually assaulted a female colleague and engaged in sexual harassment and stalking of her over several months, a fitness-to-practise inquiry has heard.

A clinical psychologist claimed the physio, Sarath Divakaran, sexually assaulted her at a hotel in Clonmel on May 27, 2019 when he allegedly placed his hand on her pubic area while sitting beside her at a conference. The inquiry heard that the DPP had directed that no prosecution should arise from the incident after it was reported to gardaí.

The psychologist – who was identified only as Miss A – broke down crying several times while giving evidence over Mr Divakaran’s “taunting, intimidating and menacing” behaviour. She described how she ended up carrying a “rape whistle” and a flashlight with a strobe effect for protection at her job.

READ MORE: HSE worker breaks down at inquiry over male colleague’s inappropriate behaviour

READ MORE: Second teen loses fight for life after e-scooter crash in Waterford

The inquiry heard that Miss A first began to feel “unsafe at work” due to the alledged unwanted attention of the physio who she claimied made repeated comments about her appearance and posture, including a suggestion that she should stand in front of a mirror naked. She described feeling very uncomfortable after being “informed by Mr Divakaran that he had been watching her movements” where they worked at South Tipperary Therapeutic Services in Clonmel, Co Tipperary.

Mr Divakaran is facing a total of 18 allegations of professional misconduct before a fitness-to-practise inquiry being held by CORU – the regulatory body of health and social care professionals. The allegations relate to claims of inappropriate behaviour and failing to maintain professional boundaries in his interactions with two female psychologists working at STTS between 2019 and 2022.

Mr Divakaran, a native of India who has worked in Ireland since 2003, claims his behaviour towards the two women has been “misinterpreted and gravely misunderstood.” While the physio, whose wife also worked at STTS at the same time, accepts that he had sometimes crossed professional boundaries, he denied engaging in any harassment or conduct of a sexual nature with his work colleagues.

On the second day of the inquiry on Thursday, Miss A described how she started receiving “unannounced and uninvited” visits to her office from Mr Divakaran shortly after she began working at STSS in January 2019. Miss A said the visits which increased in frequency over time had “no professional purposes.”

She told CORU’s fitness-to-practise committee that she declined all Mr Divakaran’s invitations to go for a coffee or a walk. “Suddenly I felt unnerved because he was watching me,” Miss A observed after the physio told her that he had been “studying” her movements.

She outlined how she had to restrict where she went at STSS in order to feel safe. Miss A said his comments about standing naked in front of a mirror and inviting her to a physio room “to check my tone” demonstrated he wanted to physically touch her. She claimed such remarks were “unsolicited and unethical” and left her feeling humiliated.

On another occasion she claims the physio told her that she “rubs well” which Miss A came to understand was a reference to masturbation. At a conference on May 27, 2019, Miss A said Mr Divakaran gave her a portrait that he had drawn of her which she declined as it made her feel “very uncomfortable and violated.”

On the same day, she claimed she was sexually assaulted by the physio when he touched her on her groin with the back of his upturned palm as he gave her back a leaflet that he had picked off her seat. “I froze. I felt really confused. I felt frightened,” she told CORU counsel, Neasa Bird BL. “I was in complete disbelief.”

Miss A said she did not report the incident to anyone at the time because she felt so humiliated and also because of the “power dynamics” of a situation involving an experienced senior physio. The inquiry heard that Miss A discovered later that summer that Mr Divakaran had also engaged in a pattern of sexual harassment and stalking of another female worker at STSS (known as Miss B).

She reported the matter to HSE management as she had grave concerns for the safety of female staff at the Clonmel facility because of the physio’s behaviour. The inquiry heard that a decision was taken to deal with the matter informally through the implementation of a safety plan at the end of 20219 which included instructions to Mr Divakaran not to park near the cars of his two colleagues or to walk near their offices.

Asked if she was unhappy with how HSE management had dealt with the issue, she replied that she had received “conflicting advice.” Miss A said she became very frightened again after Mr Divakaran started parking his car near her vehicle and walking on her corridor again in December 2020.

The inquiry heard he also tried twice to interact with her the following month when he wished her a “Happy New Year” and held a door open for her. Miss A said she reported both incidents to management straight away. “I knew I was very unsafe around this man,” she added.

The witness said the physio had shown no remorse for his actions and had demonstrated no insight into the impact of his behaviour. The inquiry heard Miss A relocated to an office in Cashel where she still felt unsafe before eventually resigning from her job after taking time off work with post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms because of Mr Divakaran’s alleged behaviour.

She fought back tears as she explained his actions had affected her career as she had to “walk away from a job I loved” and give up promotional opportunities because she was concerned for her physical and mental health. Asked about the physio’s claims that his actions had been misinterpreted, she replied that they “demonstrate what a real danger and threat he is to women.”

Under cross-examination by counsel, Elaine Finneran BL, Miss A rejected various explanations offered by Mr Divakaran over how his behaviour had been misunderstood. Ms Finneran said the physio had only been trying to be friendly towards her as a new employee such as recommending the canteen as a good place to meet colleagues.

However, Miss A said such a suggestion was “frankly insulting.” She claimed his comments about her gait and posture were part of “a repeated pattern of behaviour and a formula for grooming people” rather than the concern of a physio. Ms Finneran said her client apologised for attempting to compliment his colleague on her clothing and make-up which he realised in hindsight was inappropriate.

The barrister said Mr Divakaran’s quick “caricature” of Miss A was meant as a joke but which he now accepted was inappropriate. However, Miss A retorted: “I didn’t find it funny. I found it traumatic.” The inquiry heard earlier in the week similar evidence from Miss B who described being “terrified” and “scared” by the physio’s unwanted physical touching and comments of a sexual nature.

Both women confirmed that they are taking legal actions against both Mr Divakaran and the HSE. The inquiry was adjourned until next Tuesday when it is expected to conclude.

Join the Irish Mirror’s breaking news service on WhatsApp. Click this link to receive breaking news and the latest headlines direct to your phone. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.