Barone Defense Firm Home
Protect Your Future Don't Let One Moment
Define You. With the right defense, you can win back your life
and confidently move forward.
Criminal Charges and Michigan Mental Health Professionals: Protecting Your License and Career
A Michigan licensed professional counselor, licensed clinical social worker, psychologist, marriage and family therapist, or other licensed mental health professional facing a criminal charge is defending a professional identity built almost entirely on trust. The license to provide mental health services depends on the public's confidence that the practitioner exercises sound judgment, maintains professional boundaries, and acts with honesty and integrity. A criminal charge of any kind creates a direct challenge to that confidence, and because mental health professionals frequently work with vulnerable populations, including minors, individuals in crisis, and court-referred clients, the boards that govern these professions apply a stringent fitness and public safety standard that does not calibrate its response to the severity of the criminal classification alone. Early criminal defense strategy that accounts for licensing consequences from the first day is the only approach that gives both the criminal defense and the professional career a realistic chance.
This page addresses criminal charges and their specific implications for licensed professional counselors, licensed clinical social workers, licensed master's social workers, psychologists, marriage and family therapists, and other licensed mental health professionals in Michigan. The consequence framework that governs all licensed healthcare professionals in Michigan, including the three categories of consequence that flow from any criminal conviction, how reporting obligations work, and how criminal defense strategy must be coordinated with healthcare licensing counsel from the investigation stage, is developed in the firm's analysis of criminal charges and licensed healthcare professionals in Michigan.
How Michigan Mental Health Professionals Are Licensed and Why the Multi-Board Structure Matters
Michigan mental health professionals are licensed across multiple distinct boards, all operating under LARA's Bureau of Professional Licensing. The Michigan Board of Counseling licenses licensed professional counselors and limited licensed professional counselors. The Michigan Board of Social Work licenses licensed bachelor's social workers, licensed master's social workers, licensed clinical social workers, and limited licensed social workers.
The Michigan Board of Psychology licenses psychologists. The Michigan Board of Marriage and Family Therapy licenses marriage and family therapists. Each board operates under the authority of Article 15 of the Michigan Public Health Code and exercises disciplinary authority under MCL § 333.16221.
The multi-board structure matters for criminal defense strategy because each board has its own disciplinary subcommittee, its own history of how it applies the fitness standard to particular types of criminal charges, and its own relationship with the specific practice context its licensees occupy. A licensed clinical social worker employed in a child welfare setting and a licensed professional counselor in private practice face the same legal framework but different practical risks from the same criminal charge, because the boards evaluate conduct through the lens of what the specific practice context requires.
Understanding which board governs a particular licensee, and how that board has historically responded to the relevant charge category, is part of the licensing analysis that must begin on the first day of representation.
Why Criminal Charges Carry Heightened Risk for Mental Health Professionals Working With Vulnerable Populations
Mental health professionals whose practice involves minors, individuals in crisis, court-referred clients, or residents of regulated facilities face a profile of consequences that are more severe than that faced by mental health professionals in general adult outpatient practice, even when the criminal charge is the same.
This is not because the licensing boards apply different legal standards. It is because the professional context in which the practitioner works determines what the boards consider the charge to say about fitness and risk.
A licensed professional counselor working with court-referred domestic violence offenders who faces a domestic violence charge faces a licensing inquiry that goes directly to the fitness question the board is required to ask.
A licensed clinical social worker employed in a school setting who faces any charge touching on conduct involving minors faces a board review in which the professional context amplifies the licensing significance of the criminal charge well beyond what the charge classification alone would suggest.
A psychologist providing forensic evaluation services to courts who faces a fraud charge faces a board inquiry into whether the professional judgment required for that work can be trusted.
For mental health professionals in those practice settings, the criminal charge and the licensing consequence are connected by a shorter chain than they are for most other licensed professionals, and the licensing consequence can arrive faster because the boards recognize the public safety implications of the specific professional context.
Sexual Boundary Violations and the Therapeutic Relationship
Of all the criminal charges a mental health professional can face, those alleging sexual boundary violations within the therapeutic relationship present the most severe and most rapidly moving consequence profile. The therapeutic relationship is defined in part by the power differential between therapist and client, the client's emotional dependence and vulnerability, and the client's disclosure of intimate personal information.
Sexual conduct within that relationship or conduct that exploits the intimacy the therapeutic relationship creates, is treated by Michigan's licensing boards as among the most serious violations of professional trust a practitioner can commit.
Michigan's criminal sexual conduct framework, which the firm's Michigan sex crimes defense practice addresses in detail, classifies sexual offenses in degrees based on the nature of the conduct, the age of the victim, and the relationship between the parties. For mental health professionals, the professional relationship itself is a statutory aggravating factor.
MCL § 750.520b(1)(b)(iii) and related provisions treat sexual penetration of a client by a mental health professional in a position of authority as first-degree criminal sexual conduct, regardless of the client's apparent consent, because the law recognizes that consent obtained within a therapeutic relationship of dependency and power imbalance cannot be genuine.
That statutory structure means that a mental health professional who argues that sexual contact with a client was consensual is not raising a defense recognized by Michigan law. The degrees of criminal sexual conduct in Michigan, including how the distinction between sexual contact and sexual penetration determines the applicable charge and the range of penalties that follow, are addressed in detail in the firm's analysis of Michigan's criminal sexual conduct degrees and what each requires the government to prove.
Michael Boyle, a partner at Barone Defense Firm and graduate of the Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College, leads the firm's defense of mental health professionals facing sex offense charges, drawing on extensive psychodrama training that informs both his understanding of the therapeutic relationship and his approach to presenting these cases to juries and licensing boards.
At the federal level, a conviction for sexual conduct involving a client in the context of providing mental health services satisfies the patient-care nexus required for mandatory OIG exclusion under 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7(a)(2), because the conduct arises in connection with the delivery of a healthcare item or service.
For mental health professionals who bill Medicare or Medicaid, that exclusion is the effective end of practice in any setting that participates in federal healthcare programs. At the state level, LARA has authority under MCL § 333.16233(5) to impose a summary suspension before any formal hearing where immediate patient safety concerns exist, and sexual boundary violation allegations are among the categories most likely to produce that response.
Sex offender registration obligations under MCL § 28.721 et seq. attach to the conviction regardless of the professional relationship context and independently create licensing consequences. The tier structure of Michigan's Sex Offender Registration Act, including the in-person reporting requirements and the duration of registration obligations that apply to each tier, is addressed in the firm's analysis of Michigan SORA tier registration requirements.
Most Michigan licensing boards treat registered sex offender status as information bearing directly on professional fitness, and boards have consistently found that registered sex offender status is incompatible with continued licensure in any practice setting that involves minors, vulnerable adults, or clients who are themselves survivors of sexual trauma.
Mandatory Reporting Obligations and the Conflict They Create
Licensed mental health professionals in Michigan are mandatory reporters under MCL § 722.623, which requires any person who has reasonable cause to suspect child abuse or neglect to report that suspicion to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. That mandatory reporting obligation exists independently of the therapeutic relationship and independently of any duty of confidentiality.
It creates a specific tension for mental health professionals who are themselves under criminal investigation, because information that a client discloses in a therapy session, or that the therapist observes in a client's circumstances, may generate a reporting obligation at a time when the therapist's own legal situation makes any report more complicated to navigate.
This tension requires careful management from the outset of any criminal matter involving a licensed mental health professional. A therapist who fails to report suspected child abuse because of concerns about their own legal situation faces an independent licensing violation.
A therapist who reports in a way that is affected by the criminal investigation faces a different set of risks. Coordinating the mandatory reporting obligations with the criminal defense strategy requires counsel who understands both tracks from the first day.
What Federal Program Consequences Can Follow a Mental Health Professional's Criminal Conviction?
Mental health professionals who bill Medicare or Medicaid, whether directly or through group practice arrangements, face the same mandatory and permissive exclusion framework under 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7 that applies to all licensed healthcare professionals.
Mandatory exclusion under § 1320a-7(a)(2) applies to convictions arising from patient abuse or neglect in connection with the delivery of a healthcare service, a threshold that is satisfied by sexual boundary violations occurring in the therapeutic context. Mandatory exclusion under § 1320a-7(a)(3) applies to felony healthcare fraud convictions.
Many mental health professionals, particularly those in private practice or employed by community mental health agencies, do not directly bill Medicare or Medicaid. For those practitioners, the federal program consequence is less immediately career-ending than it is for physicians or pharmacists, but it is not absent.
Permissive exclusion under § 1320a-7(b)(4), which reaches practitioners whose state licenses have been revoked or suspended, can still affect federal program participation if the state licensing action produces that result. And for mental health professionals who work in hospital systems, federally qualified health centers, or any setting that bills federal programs, mandatory exclusion operates with the same force it does for any other licensed provider.
How Do Specific Criminal Charges Affect Michigan Mental Health Professionals?
Sex Offense Charges
As addressed above, sex offense charges present the most severe consequence profile for mental health professionals, particularly when the alleged conduct involves a client or arises within the therapeutic relationship.
The statutory framework treating the professional relationship as an aggravating factor, the mandatory OIG exclusion implications for practitioners who bill federal programs, the sex offender registration consequences, and the near-certain summary suspension or license revocation that follows a conviction of this nature all operate simultaneously.
The defense strategy must account for every one of those tracks from the first day, and the framing of the charge, what the plea reflects, and what facts are admitted in the criminal proceeding are determinative of how each track resolves.
OWI and Alcohol-Related Offenses
Mental health professionals face the same OWI reporting obligations and Board fitness review process that applies to all licensed healthcare professionals. Because Michigan licensing boards evaluate an OWI charge not as a criminal matter but as a question of whether the practitioner's judgment and reliability under conditions of impairment are compatible with the responsibilities of clinical practice, the record created in the criminal proceeding determines the position the practitioner is in when the licensing inquiry begins.
How that regulatory reframing operates for licensed healthcare professionals is addressed in the firm's analysis of how Michigan licensing boards treat alcohol-related charges against licensed healthcare professionals. For mental health professionals, the licensing analysis carries an additional dimension: many mental health practitioners work with clients whose presenting issues include substance use disorders, and a therapist's own alcohol-related criminal charge may be evaluated by the board as raising questions about whether the practitioner can provide competent and ethical services to that client population.
That professional context does not change the legal standard the board applies, but it informs how the board thinks about the fitness question that standard requires it to answer.
Fraud, Billing Irregularities, and Insurance Crimes
Mental health professionals who bill insurance carriers, Medicare, or Medicaid face exposure to healthcare billing fraud charges when billing patterns are flagged as irregular. Common triggers include billing for sessions that did not occur, billing for a higher level of service than was provided, billing for individual sessions when group sessions were provided, and billing under a supervisor's credentials without appropriate disclosure. Because mental health billing is subject to insurance payer audits and to federal program oversight, an irregularity that begins as a payer recoupment demand can escalate to a state insurance fraud complaint or a federal False Claims Act investigation.
A mental health professional who receives an audit notice, a request for records from a federal contractor, or any inquiry from the HHS-OIG should retain criminal defense counsel before responding.
Domestic Violence and Assault
Domestic violence and assault convictions create licensing exposure for mental health professionals that is amplified by the professional context in ways that do not apply to most other licensed professionals.
A therapist who works with domestic violence survivors or perpetrators and who is convicted of domestic violence faces a board inquiry that goes directly to fitness in the specific practice context. A therapist who works with court-referred clients and who is convicted of any assault offense faces a similar amplified inquiry.
The licensing consequence analysis for any assault or domestic violence charge involving a mental health professional must account for the specific client population the practitioner serves.
Other Criminal Charges
Theft, financial crimes, and charges involving dishonesty present specific concerns for mental health professionals because the therapeutic relationship depends on honesty and trustworthiness as core professional values.
A licensed professional counselor convicted of fraud, even in a context entirely unrelated to the practice of therapy, may face a board inquiry premised on whether the dishonesty that produced the criminal conviction is compatible with the honesty the therapeutic relationship requires.
No criminal conviction involving a licensed mental health professional should be evaluated without a concurrent analysis of how the board governing that specific license is likely to apply the fitness standard to the specific charge.
What Are a Michigan Mental Health Professional's Reporting Obligations After a Criminal Conviction?
Under MCL § 333.16222(3), a licensed mental health professional must self-report any criminal conviction to LARA within thirty days. Failure to self-report is an independent licensing violation subject to the full range of sanctions under MCL § 333.16226.
Under MCL § 769.16a(7), the clerk of the court reports to LARA within twenty-one days of any conviction of a licensed healthcare professional for a misdemeanor involving the illegal delivery, possession, or use of alcohol or a controlled substance, or any felony. For the charge categories most likely to trigger licensing consequences, LARA may have received court notice before the practitioner's own reporting window expires.
Mental health professionals also face ethics reporting obligations through their professional associations, including the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and the American Psychological Association, that are separate from and often more immediate than the LARA reporting obligation.
Those associations have their own ethics adjudication processes, and an adverse ethics finding can be used by a licensing board as evidence bearing on the fitness question even when the underlying criminal charge has been resolved favorably. The self-report to LARA is a formal response to a process already in motion and should never be handled without counsel.
The Compliance Conference and Why Criminal Defense Strategy Determines Its Outcome
Once a criminal conviction is reported to LARA and a formal administrative complaint is issued, the licensing proceeding begins. That proceeding may include the compliance conference mechanism authorized under MCL § 333.16231(5), an informal proceeding before the disciplinary subcommittee at which the mental health professional, represented by healthcare licensing counsel, can present context, demonstrate remediation steps, and potentially resolve the matter without formal public discipline. The compliance conference is the licensing specialist's proceeding.
What the practitioner brings to that conference, including the criminal record, the mitigation presented at sentencing, the treatment or remediation steps documented, and what the plea itself reflects about the underlying conduct, is determined entirely by decisions made in the criminal case long before the licensing proceeding begins. That is why the firm engages healthcare licensing counsel from the earliest stage of the criminal matter, coordinating strategy across both tracks simultaneously so that the criminal defense is built with the administrative outcome in mind from the first day.
HPRP, the Substance Use Evaluation, and Mitigation
Not every mental health professional who faces an alcohol- or drug-related criminal charge has a substance use disorder, and a criminal charge does not establish a clinical diagnosis. Whether a practitioner has a clinically significant alcohol or substance use issue is answered through a substance use evaluation conducted by a qualified clinician using DSM-5 diagnostic criteria.
Patrick Barone's published analysis of the DSM-5 for substance use disorders, co-authored with Dr. Elizabeth Corby and published through the State Appellate Defender Office, provides a detailed guide to how that evaluation is conducted and what the diagnostic framework means in the criminal and licensing context.
Where the evaluation indicates a clinically significant issue, early and genuine engagement with treatment serves recovery, supports sentence mitigation, and serves the licensing defense simultaneously. Sentence mitigation for licensed mental health professionals is a significant focus of this firm's practice. For mental health professionals in particular, the mitigation narrative has a dimension not present in other professions: a practitioner who has genuinely engaged with their own mental health and substance use issues, and who can speak with insight and authenticity about that engagement, presents a mitigation narrative that is both more credible and more compelling than a credential record alone.
That authenticity cannot be manufactured. It must be genuine, and it must be built with the guidance of counsel into a presentation that serves both the court and the licensing board.
A mental health professional who arrives at the compliance conference with a clinically grounded substance use evaluation, a treatment record where the evaluation supports one, and documented insight into the underlying conduct has addressed the board's primary concern before the board has had the opportunity to mandate a program to address it. That approach directly serves the goal of avoiding HPRP.
HPRP is a monitoring program administered under MCL § 333.16105a that licensing boards may require as a condition of continued licensure. Current HPRP contracts frequently carry a minimum term of three years, and any violation of the contract terms, including minor or technical violations, can result in contract extension.
A three-year contract can become five years or longer in practice, and the path to exit is neither predictable nor guaranteed. Avoiding HPRP entry, through a clinically honest evaluation, appropriate treatment where the evaluation supports it, and a defense strategy built around the record that evaluation creates, is a primary objective from the first day of representation.
Frequently Asked Questions: Criminal Charges and Michigan Mental Health Professionals
Will I Lose My Counseling or Social Work License if I Am Convicted of a Crime?
Not automatically, but a conviction of any severity creates licensing exposure that must be managed. LARA, acting through the Bureau of Professional Licensing and the applicable licensing board, evaluates criminal convictions under a fitness and public safety standard.
For mental health professionals, that standard is applied with particular attention to whether the conviction reflects on the qualities, including honesty, sound judgment, and appropriate professional boundaries, that the therapeutic relationship requires. Early engagement of criminal defense counsel and healthcare licensing counsel gives the practitioner the best available position.
Can I Continue to See Clients While My Criminal Case Is Pending?
In many cases, yes, unless LARA imposes a summary suspension under MCL § 333.16233(5). Summary suspension before conviction is most likely when the charge involves alleged conduct toward a client or raises acute patient safety concerns. Employers and agencies may act independently of LARA, and many employment contracts require self-disclosure of criminal charges within a short period. A practitioner who fails to disclose to an employer as required by contract may face immediate termination and NPDB reporting independently of any LARA action.
A Client Made a Complaint to My Licensing Board at the Same Time Criminal Charges Were Filed. How Do I Handle Both?
The licensing board complaint and the criminal charge are separate proceedings, but they share an evidentiary foundation and their outcomes influence each other. Statements made in the licensing proceeding can be used in the criminal case, and the criminal record will be reviewed in the licensing proceeding.
Managing both proceedings requires coordinated legal representation from the outset. Criminal defense counsel and healthcare licensing counsel must communicate from day one so that no position taken in one proceeding inadvertently damages the other. This is precisely the coordination model the firm employs from the first day of representation.
Does a Sex Offense Charge Involving a Client Automatically Result in License Revocation?
It does not automatically result in revocation in the sense that the outcome is predetermined without any proceeding. But a sex offense conviction involving a client in the therapeutic context is among the most serious licensing violations the boards address, and revocation is the most likely outcome of the formal proceeding that follows. The defense strategy must be oriented toward the criminal proceeding with full awareness of that licensing consequence, because every decision made in the criminal case, including what charge is resolved, what facts are admitted, and what the plea reflects, determines the position the practitioner is in when the licensing proceeding begins.
I Work With Court-Referred Clients. Does My Criminal Charge Affect Those Referral Relationships?
It can, and it may affect them before any formal licensing action is taken. Courts and probation departments that refer clients to therapists conduct their own background checks and impose their own standards for approved providers. A criminal charge, not merely a conviction, may cause a court or agency to remove a practitioner from its approved provider list pending the outcome of the criminal matter. That consequence can arrive faster than any formal licensing proceeding and can have immediate economic impact that requires its own strategic management.
Should I Participate in HPRP Before My Case Is Resolved?
That decision should not be made without a substance use evaluation and without coordination between criminal defense counsel and healthcare licensing counsel. A mental health professional who does not meet the DSM-5 diagnostic threshold for a substance use disorder should not be directed toward a monitoring program the clinical picture does not support. Where the evaluation indicates a clinically significant issue, early voluntary treatment outside the HPRP framework may serve both recovery and the defense better than early HPRP enrollment. This decision requires legal and clinical guidance before any contact with HPRP is initiated.
What Is the Role of Sentence Mitigation for a Licensed Mental Health Professional?
Where the evaluation indicates a clinically significant issue, early and genuine engagement with treatment serves recovery, supports sentence mitigation, and serves the licensing defense simultaneously. The mitigation presentation built for the sentencing court is the same record the licensing board will evaluate, which means those two tracks must be constructed together from the beginning.
Sentence mitigation for licensed mental health professionals is a focused area of this firm's practice, developed in formal collaboration with Doug Passon, an internationally recognized sentencing mitigation expert whose work in this field was identified by the Wall Street Journal as pioneering. Patrick Barone and Mr. Passon co-authored Using Psychodrama for Sentencing Mitigation, published in the NACDL Champion in July 2024.
For mental health professionals in particular, the mitigation narrative carries a dimension not present in other professions. A practitioner who has genuinely engaged with their own mental health and substance use issues, and who can speak with insight and authenticity about that engagement, presents a narrative that is both more credible and more compelling than a credential record alone.
That authenticity cannot be manufactured. It must be genuine, and it must be built with the guidance of counsel into a presentation that serves both the court and the licensing board.
Next Steps for Michigan Mental Health Professionals Facing Criminal Charges
If you are a licensed professional counselor, licensed clinical social worker, psychologist, marriage and family therapist, or other licensed mental health professional in Michigan facing any criminal charge, the most important step is retaining criminal defense counsel who understands not only the criminal case but the full scope of what it sets in motion across the licensing, ethics, employer, and court referral tracks.
At Barone Defense Firm, we represent Michigan mental health professionals where criminal charges carry consequences that extend far beyond the courtroom into the professional relationships and trust on which a mental health practice depends. We engage healthcare licensing specialists as part of the defense team from the earliest possible stage, coordinating criminal defense strategy with licensing counsel as a unified team from the first day of the matter.
To schedule a confidential consultation, call (248) 306-9158 or 1-877-ALL-MICH (877-255-6424), or contact us online. Consultations are available around the clock.
This page was written by Patrick Barone, founding attorney of Barone Defense Firm in Birmingham, Michigan. Patrick has represented licensed healthcare professionals at the intersection of criminal defense and professional licensing consequences for more than three decades. His published analyses include Representing Licensed Health Care Professionals Accused of Alcohol- or Drug-Related Crimes, published in the Michigan Bar Journal in October 2013, and Criminal Accusations Cause Health Care Professionals to Face Potentially Debilitating Collateral Consequences, published through the State Appellate Defender Office. His analysis of the DSM-5 for substance use disorders, co-authored with Dr. Elizabeth Corby and published through the State Appellate Defender Office, addresses the clinical and legal framework governing substance use evaluations in criminal and licensing proceedings. Patrick is a graduate of the Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College, a Board Certified TEP (the highest level of certification) in psychodrama, sociometry, and group psychotherapy through the American Board of Examiners, and the only such credential holder in Michigan. He has been recognized as a Michigan Super Lawyer continuously since 2007 and is listed in The Best Lawyers in America. The firm's federal practice covers both the Eastern and Western Districts of Michigan. Michael Boyle, a partner at Barone Defense Firm and graduate of the Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College, serves as lead counsel on sex crimes cases including criminal sexual conduct charges at every degree. Mr. Boyle brings extensive psychodrama training to client preparation and courtroom advocacy, reflecting the firm's commitment to developing authentic defense narratives for clients facing the most consequential charges in the criminal system.
