Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement Sexual Misconduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board seeks new authority to impose chaperones, automatic suspensions in sexual‑misconduct cases
Summary
Staff asked the Board of Chiropractic Examiners to pursue legislative changes removing a seven‑year limit for denying licensure in sexual‑misconduct cases, to allow automatic suspension/revocation for certain convictions, and to authorize a chaperone requirement during pending criminal or administrative proceedings; board members expressed support and urgency.
The California Board of Chiropractic Examiners on Thursday recommended that the board ask the Legislature for expanded enforcement tools in response to a spike in sexual‑misconduct matters in its caseload.
In a detailed presentation, staff described proposed statutory language modeled on the Medical Board that would remove the current seven‑year limitation for denying licensure for prior professional discipline involving sexual misconduct, allow automatic suspension or revocation in specified felony or repeat fraud convictions, and permit the board to impose a requirement for a third‑party chaperone during patient encounters while criminal or administrative proceedings are pending. "We have 31 that have been filed and unfortunately 14 of those cases would qualify under this language," staff said, summarizing the board's current workload and why staff judged new authority necessary.
The chaperone provision is novel among Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) boards, staff said. Under the proposed wording, the board could order a license restriction requiring a third party to be present ‘‘while consulting, examining or treating patients’’ once a criminal complaint, indictment or information is filed or when the board itself files an accusation alleging sexual misconduct. Staff said the provision would include safeguards, such as limiting chaperones who have close personal relationships with the licensee and preserving a licensee’s right to a hearing and to have the restriction removed if proceedings are dismissed.
Board members responded with support for stronger interim protections. "That's probably the biggest ask that we're putting in the sunset…because we're trying to do something that nobody's done yet," one director said, praising the proposal’s emphasis on public safety. Other board members urged care to ensure enforcement language is defensible and operationally feasible.
Staff framed the changes as targeted public‑protection measures rather than punitive steps without due process. They said the authority to act quickly — for example, to impose a chaperone requirement on the basis of a filed accusation or an arrest notification — is intended to reduce the time victims remain exposed while legal proceedings play out.
Next steps: staff will incorporate the board’s direction into the sunset bill package and finalize language for formal board action at a forthcoming session before the proposed measures are pursued in the Legislature.
