MD MFT Juris study materials
MD MFT Juris study resources

MD MFT Juris: Discipline, Complaints, Hearings, and Board Authority

MD MFT Juris · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Discipline, Complaints, Hearings, and Board Authority

Grounds for discipline

  • Fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining or renewing a license; unlicensed practice; incompetence or gross negligence; unprofessional conduct.
  • Sexual misconduct or exploitative boundaries; abandoning clients; violating confidentiality; failing to keep records; practicing while impaired.
  • Failing to report required abuse or neglect; violating the practice act, COMAR, or a Board order; failing to cooperate with an investigation.
  • A criminal conviction can support discipline when it relates to honesty, fitness, or the practice of therapy; a client complaint is not required.

Complaint and hearing procedure

  • A complaint may come from a client, employer, colleague, agency, or the Board itself. The Board screens and investigates, may subpoena records and witnesses, and may offer an informal resolution or consent order.
  • If contested, the licensee receives notice of the allegations and an opportunity for a hearing, with counsel, evidence, and cross-examination. The case may be heard by the Board or referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings; the Board issues the final decision.
  • Sanctions include reprimand, probation, conditions, suspension, revocation, and civil penalties as authorized. Judicial review is by the circuit court, usually on the administrative record.

Worked example

A licensee is convicted of insurance fraud unrelated to a client. The Board opens a case. The conviction does not automatically revoke the license, but it is relevant to honesty and professional fitness. The Board gives notice and a hearing, considers the conduct and mitigation, and may impose probation or suspension. The licensee cannot avoid discipline by arguing that no client was harmed.

Traps

  • Assuming a complaint must be filed by a client.
  • Thinking an acquittal or dropped charge bars Board action; the standards differ.
  • Ignoring a Board subpoena or missing a hearing deadline.
  • Confusing the Board's final order with the administrative law judge's proposed decision.