Recent Examples of Disciplinary Actions Levied by the Missouri Committee of Psychologists

/in /by

The Missouri Committee of Psychologists is the governing administrative agency for psychologists in Missouri. The Missouri Committee of Psychologists (“the Committee”) regulates the practice of psychology by ensuring proper licensing by people holding themselves out to the public as psychologists, and making certain that psychologists meet proper educational requirements, as well as continuing educational guidelines. The Committee is also charged with investigating psychologists who have allegedly violated the governing rules of ethics or for other forms of misconduct. Professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger is a zealous advocate for licensees facing disciplinary actions in Missouri.

The authority to investigate psychologists is conferred by statute in Missouri. Missouri Revised Statutes section 337.035.1 et seq. delineates numerous grounds upon which the Committee may investigate for disciplinary reasons, including but not limited to ethics violations, criminal convictions, failure to pay taxes, and the like. If the Committee finds evidence of one or more grounds for discipline, then the Committee may file a complaint with the Missouri Administrative Hearings Commission. If the Hearings Commission rules that the Committee met its burden, the Hearings Commission may levy discipline.

The Hearings Commission is authorized by statute to hear the allegations brought by the Committee against the licensee. The Hearings Commission then refers the matter back to the Committee if the Committee has met its burden to prove the allegations at the hearing. The authority conferred by statute to the Committee permits discipline in the nature of censure, probation of a license with appropriate conditions not to exceed five years, suspension of a license for no longer than three years, or revocation of a license.

An examination of recent disciplinary rulings is instructive to practitioners to help assess the prevailing rationale of the Committee. In one case, the psychologist was unable to satisfy the continuing educational requirements. The Hearings Commission found that the licensee was subject to discipline as a result of that failure. The Committee placed the licensee on probation for three years with numerous conditions. The licensee indicated to the Commission that his own mental state was not stable, which caused him to fail to meet continuing educational requirements. Those conditions included submitting to an evaluation to assess the licensee’s own mental condition for fitness to practice as a psychologist.

In another decision, involving more egregious facts, the Committee and licensee entered into a stipulation for discipline. The licensee became romantically involved with a former patient. The patient had sought counseling for a period of time and then failed to keep an appointment.  The licensee failed to send a termination letter or conduct a termination session. Shortly thereafter, the licensee and patient became romantically involved. The Committee and licensee reached an agreement wherein the licensee would be suspended for three years from practice and be placed on probation for three years if the license was reinstated. The Committee ordered the psychologist to submit to a psychological assessment and attend counseling if necessary.

In a very recent decision, the Committee accepted a stipulation for a psychologist who self-reported an ethical violation. The psychologist reported that he failed to maintain appropriate notes, referrals, examination tests, and other documentation required to be maintained by Missouri law. The licensee informed the Committee that adverse working conditions prevented the necessary record keeping. The Committee and licensee entered into a stipulation that the licensee would voluntarily surrender his license, “in lieu of other discipline.”

Contact an Experienced Professional Licensing Attorney for Assistance

Even trained professionals make mistakes. Do not compound the problem by representing yourself if you face a disciplinary complaint.  Kansas Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger has helped many clients keep their licenses despite facing disciplinary action. Attorney Sanger will tirelessly advocate for you to keep your license to practice. Call Attorney Sanger today at 785-979-4353 for your free consultation, and learn what a difference experience makes.

Kansas Professional Licensing Attorney Explains Due Process in Administrative Hearings

/in /by

Due process of law is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  Each and every person is guaranteed due process protection every time life, liberty, or property is at stake.   Our system of law is premised upon the belief that life and liberty are fundamental to a free society.  Most associate this indispensable tenet of our law as applying to criminal trials but do not recognize the significance of due process in other areas of life.  Professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger is highly experienced in representing licensees to ensure they enjoy all of the due process protections guaranteed by the Fifth amendment to the United States Constitution.

Depriving a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law is not just idle legal theory. Due process protects us from arbitrary governmental action taking away something of ours we value. A person charged with a crime enjoys the highest level of protection the due process clause offers because their liberty, and maybe their life, may be taken from them.  In that context, due process means ensuring that a person is represented by competent counsel, is tried publically by an impartial jury of his or her peers, has the opportunity to confront and cross-examine witnesses called to testify, and, significantly, is made aware of the charges the government has  levied against him or her.

A professional licensee also enjoys due process protections when the government seeks to deprive them of their license. This is true because a professional license is “property” within the meaning of the due process clause. Notwithstanding, licensees facing discipline do not enjoy the same protections guaranteed to criminal defendants. A licensee who may be deprived of a professional license is guaranteed due process of law; however, the rights of the licensee are not as extensive in an administrative hearing as are a criminal defendant’s at a criminal trial.

Procedural distinctions between criminal trials and administrative hearings exist. The government in an administrative hearing is not required to specifically plead certain allegations. Rather, the government must inform the licensee about the factual allegations contained in the complaint sufficiently to allow the licensee to form a defense. If the facts are clearly set out, then the licensee has notice of the charges.  Notwithstanding, if the government pleads a violation of specific rules, then the government must prove a violation of the specific rule. Furthermore, allegations amended to the complaint based upon a licensee’s testimony at the hearing violates the due process rights of the licensee.

Kansas passed a statute called the “Administrative Procedure Act (the “Act”), which governs administrative hearings. The Act codifies the procedural rights parties enjoy when facing an administrative hearing. Under the Act, all licensees are afforded the opportunity to be heard and present a defense against the allegations, including the ability to call witnesses to testify on their behalf.  Parties have the right to cross-examine witnesses appearing against them. The Act mandates administrative hearings must be open to the public unless there is a compelling reason to close the hearing.

Take Immediate Action to Preserve Your Due Process Rights

Call Kansas Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger today at 785-979-4353 if you have been notified of a complaint by a professional licensing board. With 10 years of experience as an assistant attorney general, and many more representing professionals, Attorney Sanger will fight to protect your rights. Attorney Sanger will make certain that any hearing you face will be conducted fairly and impartially. Act now to protect your rights. Call professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger today to schedule a free consultation.

Social Workers in Missouri Provide Expert Care While Maintaining High Ethical Standards

/in /by

Social workers provide an invaluable service to the community. Social work has been described as a “calling” rather than a “career.” Social workers provide care to those who are most in need of service. Many social workers dedicate their professional lives to serving the impoverished, the addicted, the helpless—such as children and the elderly—while fighting for “social justice.” The social worker toils at the intersection of an individual’s private matters and public welfare. Thus, social workers find themselves in a unique position and provide an invaluable service to our communities. Notwithstanding, social workers must adhere to the high standards of ethical behavior. Professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger understands the invaluable role social workers play in society and is ready to fight for those who fight for justice.

Social workers serve a vulnerable community. They are healthcare providers in terms of mental health counseling and addiction treatment. Social workers fill vital roles in the prison system as well. They assist incarcerated individuals in obtaining treatment, meeting educational requirements, and helping prepare prisoners for reintegration into society upon release. Social workers also fill a critical need at the family level by administering care to children in need and helping to protect them. They also play a similar role for the elderly.

In Missouri, social workers must adhere to high personal moral standards and competence. Social workers must adhere to Missouri’s licensing requirements. These are enumerated by statute. Missouri’s regulations for social workers mandate that social workers have an obligation to protect the public from incompetence, educational deficiency, lack of experience, or low moral standards by people attempting to practice social work. To protect the vulnerable from abuse and mistreatment, social workers must obey promulgated ethical rules, and be truthful. Failure to obey the rules and regulations will subject the social worker to disciplinary action against their license.

Social workers must be vigilant against developing personal relationships with their clients. Social workers are deeply involved in their patients’ lives. It is understandable if the patient develops personal feelings for their social worker. It is incumbent upon the social worker to maintain the highest degree of professionalism and not engage a patient in a personal relationship. Accordingly, a social worker is prohibited from sexually exploiting their clients. Furthermore, social workers may not enter into a personal relationship with a client and remain the client’s social worker in situations where the social worker has provided treatment or services for mental illness or emotional problems. Business relationships are also prohibited between social worker and patient. These prohibitions are in place to protect the patient and also to ensure that the patient receives the highest degree of care from the social worker. A social worker cannot provide competent care when the social worker cannot remain objective about the client.

A social worker must also maintain objectivity about the services they are asked to provide. A social worker must refer a matter to a colleague if they are not competent to handle the client or subject matter. Although it might be financially advantageous to serve clients outside of their main competency, social workers must be objective about their services and make referrals that are in the best interest of the patient. Furthermore, the social worker must terminate treatment when the patient has achieved their treatment goal or is no longer benefitting from services.

Call for Immediate Assistance if You Are Facing Disciplinary Action

Missouri Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger is a zealous advocate for professional licensees. Call attorney Sanger today at 785-979-4353 to schedule a free consultation. Attorney Sanger will thoroughly analyze your case and provide you with the best defense against allegations of social worker misconduct in Missouri and Kansas. She will fight for those who dedicate their lives to fighting for others.

Athletic Trainers in Kansas are Governed By the Kansas Board of Healing Arts

/in /by

Athletic trainers are an indispensable component to scholastic athletes’ health and well-being in Kansas. Recognizing their importance, athletic trainers in the state of Kansas fall under the purview of the Kansas Board of Healing Arts. The Board of Healing Arts (“the Board”) has the authority to license, investigate, and discipline athletic trainers in the same manner as physicians, psychologists, and other health care professionals. The Board’s supervision ensures all athletic trainers are licensed and maintain the minimum level of competence required to treat athletes. Any athletic trainer falling below those standards or failing to satisfy other mandated requirements is subject to discipline. Professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger has vigorously advocated against discipline on behalf of professional licensees, including athletic trainers, in Kansas and Missouri.

Governance of athletic trainers in Kansas is bestowed upon the Board by statute. That statute, K.S.A. 65-6901 et seq., defines an athletic trainer and a trainer’s duties. Additionally, the statute authorizes the Board to minimum standards for an athletic trainer, licensing requirements, establish regulations governing the practice of athletic training, establish fees, and grounds for discipline. Discipline under the statute includes a criminal sanction for practicing as an athletic trainer without a license which is a class b nonperson misdemeanor. The statute authorizes additional, non-criminal discipline, depending upon the nature of the violation, as denial of licensure, revocation of license, public censure, probation, or any other discipline the Board deems appropriate. The Board also had the authority to apply for an injunction from a court having jurisdiction to immediately stop a violation of the rules and regulations.

The Board is permitted to issue discipline for a number of violations. Violations under the statute are:

  • Use of alcohol and/or drugs to the “extent that it impairs the individual’s ability to engage in athletic training”;
  • Felony conviction or other action that betrays the public trust;
  • Committing fraud or misrepresentation to obtain or maintain a license;
  • Committing fraud or misrepresentation to obtain a fee or other economic benefit;
  • Incompetence, fraud, or other misrepresentation while practicing as an athletic trainer;
  • Violating, or helping someone else violate, any rule or regulation established under the statute;
  • Impersonating an athletic trainer;
  • Intentionally or negligently violating rules or regulations established by statute;
  • Violating the public trust; or
  • Professional misconduct as defined by the rules and regulations established by the statute.

To this point in 2015, the Board has levied discipline against three athletic trainers. One applicant for licensure as an athletic trainer disclosed that he had acted as and held himself out as an athletic trainer in 2014 for the Wichita High School system as well as a semi-professional soccer team without being licensed. The Board issued discipline in the nature of a public censure.   The Board also ordered the applicant to research and draft an essay on the importance of an athletic trainer’s licensing requirements and delineating the scope of practice for an athletic trainer.  

Another athletic trainer faced discipline for failing to timely renew her license.  The trainer practiced athletic training during the months in which she was unlicensed. The Board found she committed misconduct by practicing athletic training without a license. She was publically censured for her transgressions.

A third trainer was disciplined for practicing without a license. This trainer held himself out as an “Interim Head Athletic Trainer” for a community college athletic program despite failing to timely renew his license. This trainer was subject to public censure and ordered to research and draft an essay to be published for public review discussing the importance of licensing and scope of the athletic trainer’s practice.

Professional Licensing Attorney Ready to Help Fight for You

Although public censure and writing an essay does not appear to be serious punishment, any public reprimand against a professional license could have disastrous consequences. Contact Kansas Professional Licensing Defense Lawyer Danielle Sanger if you are facing discipline in Kansas or Missouri. Attorney Sanger is renowned for tirelessly fighting for her clients and obtaining just results. Call Attorney Sanger today at 785-979-4353 today to schedule a consultation.

 

Kansas Board of Healing Arts Has Authority to Investigate Physician’s Conduct Occurring in Missouri

/in /by

Physicians who practice medicine in multiple states may be subject to investigation and discipline for conduct occurring outside of Kansas.  The Kansas Supreme Court conferred jurisdiction to the Kansas Board of Healing Arts to investigate physicians and potentially discipline Kansas physicians for conduct outside of Kansas. As an experienced professional licensing attorney in Kansas and Missouri, Danielle Sanger, Esq., is well versed with defending physicians facing discipline.

The Kansas Board of Healing Arts has jurisdiction to sanction a physician’s license despite the actionable conduct occurring in another state.  In Ryser v. State of Kansas et als., 284 P. 3d 337 (Kansas 2012), the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that the Kansas Board of Healing Arts (“Board”) has the jurisdiction, or the legal authority, to regulate the practice of medicine even if the questioned conduct occurred in another state. In so ruling, the Kansas Supreme Court indicated that the Board has “broad authority to regulate the practice of medicine.”   As part of that authority, the Board “shall undertake investigations regarding its authority to regulate medical practice in Kansas under the “Healing Arts Act (‘the Act’).”  

At the time the litigation commenced, Carol Ann Ryser, M.D., was licensed to practice medicine in both Kansas and Missouri. The Board issued a subpoena for medical records for a patient of Dr. Ryser’s pursuant to its subpoena authority conferred under the Act after Dr. Ryser was sued for malpractice in Missouri. Dr. Ryser moved to quash the subpoena. Dr. Ryser argued that the Act did not grant the Board jurisdiction to investigate claims of malpractice that occurred in Missouri. Dr. Ryser sued in the district court to quash the subpoena and the district court denied her motion. Dr. Ryser appealed to the Kansas Supreme Court.

The Kansas Supreme Court upheld the district court’s ruling ordering the subpoena to issue. In ruling against Dr. Ryser, the Court was forced to decide whether the Board possessed jurisdiction over the matter. The Court considered what authority the Act conferred to the Board to investigate. Under the Act, the Board has the duty to investigate matters involving competency, unprofessional conduct, or “any other matter which may result in disciplinary action against a licensee.”  While Dr. Ryser admitted she was licensed to practice medicine in Kansas (because she was in fact licensed in Kansas), she argued that she was not practicing under the Act because the alleged incident occurred while she was treating the patient in Missouri.

The Court thoroughly examined the term “licensee” as it applies to the Act.  The Act itself fails to define what it means to practice under the Act. The Court examined other terms and definitions of other terms within the Act to assist with the interpretation of what it means to “practice.” Consequently, the Court turned to the definition of “healing arts.” The definition of “healing arts” under the Act includes numerous practices and treatments but also without “limitation to the practice of medicine and surgery.”

The Court next turned to the Act’s definition of the “practice of medicine and surgery” to further explicate the meaning of “practice.” The Court was persuaded that “persons deemed to be engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery” are individuals who hold themselves out to the public as physicians or surgeons.  Because the Act, by its own terms, fails to include a geographical limitation upon the practice of medicine, the Court concluded the Board may investigate actions occurring in another state.

Physicians Facing Discipline Must Hire a Zealous Advocate

Danielle Sanger, Esq., has fought to protect the livelihood of Kansas and Missouri physicians facing discipline.  Kansas Professional Licensing Defense Lawyer Danielle Sanger is a zealous advocate who will fight to defend you against allegations of misconduct in the practice of medicine. Call attorney Sanger today at 785-979-4353 for your free consultation.  

An Overview of the Missouri State Committee of Marital and Family Therapists Standards for Ethics

/in /by

In Missouri, the State Committee of Martial and Family Therapists governs all licensees practicing marital and family therapy. The State Committee of Marital and Family Therapists (“the Committee”) is established by statute and is charged with passing regulations establishing the ethical standards of marital and family therapy, among other issues involving marital and family therapists. The regulations provide minimum professional standards for therapists and delineates specific concerns regarding client welfare. The regulations seek to maintain the public trust in the profession as well as protection of the individual patient. A violation of the ethical standards allows the Committee to seek discipline against a licensed therapist.  Professional licensing attorney Danielle Sanger is a skilled advocate for licensees facing discipline resulting from an alleged violation of ethical standards of therapists.

Chapter 3 of Division 2233 of the Code of State Regulations for Missouri codifies the ethical standards of marital and family therapists. Not only does Chapter 3 regulate the general practice of marital and family therapy, it also purports to establish the minimum requirements to which a therapist must adhere to protect a patient’s welfare. Although seemingly rudimentary, failure to adhere to these standards is grounds for discipline. All of the regulations are designed to protect the best interest of the patient.

Section .010 of Chapter 3 delineates the competency requirements of a martial and family therapist. A marital and family therapist must limit his or her practice to those areas in which the therapist has studied and trained. The therapist is required to maintain competence by attending continuing educational classes, trainings, and supervision that meets current scientific standards in the profession.  A therapist is not limited to practicing only what they studied. If they do wish to employ a therapeutic technique new to them or practice in a new area, they must educate and train themselves in that new technique or service. The therapist must obtain informed consent from the patient before using the technique or service by warning of the process as well as any potential risks associated with the technique or service.

Section .010 also guides the therapist as to when counseling may not be commenced or must be terminated. Counseling must be terminated if the therapist is unable to perform his or her duties owning to emotional, psychological, or addiction concerns.  Also, a therapist cannot accept a patient or continue to counsel a patient if the therapist’s objectivity or competency is compromised by emotional, sexual, familial, or other relationship with the patient. The therapist is expressly prohibited from making sexual advances, having a sexual relationship, or sexually or suggestively touch a patient. Section .010 contains other patient protections. The therapist must not take financial advantage of a patient and must always maintain strictest confidentiality. 

The patient welfare component of Chapter 3 is set out in Section .020. This section requires that the therapist must advise and obtain informed consent of the patient prior to commencing therapy. Informed consent, in this context, requires advising the patient about the specific form of therapy, the goals of therapy, the benefits and risks involved in therapy, the therapist’s credentials, the financial consideration, and the limits of confidentiality. Additionally, therapists are required to obtain a substitute therapist in the event of lengthy absence from practice. Therapists must also explain the patient’s diagnosis and condition to the patient in terms the patient can understand.

An accusation of unethical conduct is harmful.

If you have been accused of unethical conduct as a marital or family therapist, call Kansas Professional Licensing Attorney Danielle Sanger. She is a tireless advocate for professional licensees. She will fight to protect your livelihood. Her experience in defending ethical violations is unparalleled. Call Attorney Sanger today at (785) 979-4353 today to schedule a no-obligation consultation and learn what a difference experience makes.