Psychotherapist Steven R. Mason asks Board to end probation after multi-year sobriety and training

A petitioner hearing before the Board of Behavioral Sciences on Aug. 21, 2025, examined a request from Dr. Steven Richard Mason to modify or terminate probation imposed after a prior disciplinary matter. The matter was heard by Administrative Law Judge Abe (Abraham) Levy; Deputy Attorney General Blair MacGregor presented the state’s records and Attorney Scott Harris represented Mason. Mason testified about his sobriety, professional training and compliance with probationary conditions.

Mason, who identified himself on the record as “Doctor Steven Richard Mason,” told the board he has “been entirely sober … since '20, 2017.” He described completing a doctoral program and receiving a psychologist license since the original probation. Mason said he has complied with random testing, therapy requirements and other probation terms and that he is in ongoing psychoanalytic training that will include “4 days per week of therapy for roughly the next 4 to 5 years.”

Harris, Mason’s counsel, framed the petition as one showing rehabilitation: “What you will find today is that you will meet a man who comes before you very humbled by the past that he brings before you and someone who has spent the last 7 years in recovery and in sobriety and investing in his personal growth.” Harris asked the board to find that public protection has been met and to terminate probation.

Deputy Attorney General Blair MacGregor noted the admitted exhibits and drew attention to the probation analyst report showing Mason in compliance. MacGregor told the panel the attorney general had “no specific recommendation” but highlighted materials the office would have preferred to see, and noted questions about aspects of his history and supports. Several board members asked detailed questions about Mason’s support system, therapy, AA attendance, prior DUIs and employment. Mason described working with adolescents at an inpatient facility, teaching and remaining engaged in training and supervision pathways.

Board members pressed on specific issues the board typically weighs in early-termination petitions: the length of sober time, continuing supports (including AA attendance without a sponsor), the presence of ongoing therapy, whether Mason’s rehabilitation is durable and how probation restrictions (for example, limits on supervisory roles) affect public protection. Mason and his counsel supplied letters from employers and colleagues and said professional references had been informed of his disciplinary history.

At the close of testimony, the ALJ admitted exhibits 1–6 into the record and the board members completed questioning. The record was then closed and the matter was “deemed submitted” for the board’s decision, which was not issued at the hearing. The board did not take a public vote at the hearing; it will issue a written decision and notify the parties.

The proceedings were administrative; no policy change, supervisory appointment, or new discipline was imposed at the hearing. The board will weigh compliance with probation terms, the depth of documented insight and supports, and any remaining risk to the public before ruling on Mason’s petition.