A Fife social care worker has been struck off after a series of assaults, including on a police officer, and unsafe conduct involving a vulnerable person in her care.
The Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) has removed Megan McPherson, whose town of employment was Glenrothes, from its register of social care workers, with the decision taking effect on June 17.
The council found her fitness to practise was impaired because of misconduct towards a person who uses care services and later convictions for multiple assaults and threatening and abusive behaviour.
While under investigation, McPherson was convicted at Edinburgh Sheriff Court in November 2024 of assault and assault of a police constable after attempting to punch one person and spitting on a police officer in Penicuik in February 2023.
In July 2025, at Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court, she was convicted of assault and of threatening and abusive behaviour after spitting in a woman’s face in Methil and shouting, swearing, throwing household items, damaging a television and struggling with police officers during an incident in February 2024.
The SSSC said there was a pattern of “violent and abusive behaviour” and warned that the risk of her repeating it was high.
McPherson’s case began after an incident in January 2023, when she attended the home of an individual known as AA outside working hours while employed as a home carer for East Fife Care at Home by Fife Council.
The authority found that she moved AA to bed using a tracking hoist on her own when this should normally be done by two people, failed to make sure AA had access to her community alarm pendant and later banged on the door after leaving her phone inside.
The following day she returned, banged on the door again and spoke to AA through a window asking for her phone back.
The council said she failed to maintain professional boundaries, put herself and AA at unnecessary risk of harm and showed a “serious lack of judgement”, and noted she had not engaged with its investigation or shown insight, apology or regret.
It concluded that a warning, conditions or suspension would not adequately protect the public, and that a Removal Order was necessary in the public interest and to maintain trust in social services and in the regulator.
Share