Board of Behavioral Sciences hears petition for early termination of probation from Scott Johnson; no decision made

The Board of Behavioral Sciences heard testimony May 8 from Scott Johnson, an associate marriage and family therapist registration holder, seeking early termination of his probationary registration. The hearing was conducted before Administrative Law Judge Marcy Larson at the Office of Administrative Hearings and included appearances by Deputy Attorney General Anahita Crawford and probation staff. The record was submitted to the board at the close of the hearing; the board took no final action at the session.

Johnson told the board he was originally disciplined after his intern registration in 2013 and that his case history includes a 2006 conviction for driving without a license and a 2010 conviction related to alcohol. He said he has remained sober for more than a decade and has been compliant with the probation terms the board imposed. “I make every effort to be ethical, to make informed decisions in the care of my clients,” Johnson told the board when asked whether he deemed himself safe to practice.

Why it matters: The board’s decision could affect Johnson’s eligibility for full licensure and his ability to present himself for employment as a licensed marriage and family therapist. The case also illustrates how psychological evaluations and administrative proceedings can extend the time someone remains on probationary licensure and how boards weigh past conduct, clinical supervision and current fitness to practice when considering early termination requests.

Record and disciplinary history presented at the hearing showed a statement of issues filed August 15, 2012, and a decision resulting in issuance of an associate registration placed on probation in October 2013. Probation terms included psychological evaluation, psychotherapy, supervised practice and education. The deputy attorney general outlined a later petition to revoke based on a period in which Johnson did not practice for three years. Effective measures taken in 2018 and 2019 produced a renewed five‑year probation term; the board’s staff reported Johnson is currently compliant with testing, supervision and reporting requirements.

Johnson described three separate psychological evaluations over the course of the case. He said the first two evaluations concluded he was unsafe to practice; a third evaluation in 2019, which he reported was more extensive and included multiple in‑person interviews and projective testing, concluded he was fit to practice. Johnson said the later evaluator “debunked the first two psychological evaluations” by reviewing their methods and reaching a different conclusion that cleared him to resume clinical work.

Johnson described sustained participation in psychotherapy, weekly supervision in his current clinical role since 2022 and frequent Alcoholics Anonymous involvement. He said he has worked in human services during periods he was not allowed to practice clinically and that he now has approximately 3,500 supervised clinical hours on file toward licensure. He told the board he remained fully compliant with quarterly reporting and testing requirements over the past decade.

Board members questioned Johnson about why long stretches of his probation did not include clinical practice and asked for details about the timing and content of the psychological evaluations. Johnson said limitations in access to clinicians, insurance and a treating therapist’s severe medical illness affected his ability to complete required psychotherapy early in the process. He acknowledged he had not been given full copies of the first two reports during the earlier stages of the proceedings and said he received more complete materials before the 2019 administrative hearing where he cross‑examined an evaluator.

At the close of the hearing, Deputy Attorney General Anahita Crawford stated the staff had no further evidence to present; exhibits 1–10 and exhibit A (letters uploaded by the petitioner) were admitted into the record during the hearing. Judge Larson swore Johnson, accepted his testimony, and the matter was “submitted for the board’s consideration”; no vote or final board determination was made in open session on May 8.

The board will deliberate and issue any ruling under its standard internal procedures. If the board grants early termination, that would change Johnson’s registration status and could affect his path to full licensure; if denied, probation would continue until its scheduled termination date reported by staff. The hearing record and admitted exhibits will inform the board’s subsequent decision.

Ending note: The case record lists OAH case number 2025040351 and an internal case/citation of 2002017000391, and the proceeding was held under the Board of Behavioral Sciences within the California Department of Consumer Affairs. The board indicated the matter was submitted at the close of the hearing and the record is closed for adjudication.