May 19th, 2025
Marc Berman
Chair, Assembly Committee on Business and Professions
1020 N Street, Room 379
Sacramento, CA 95814
Angelique Ashby
Chair, Senate Committee on Business, Professions, and Economic Development
1021 O Street, Room 3320
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Joint Sunset Review – Board of Psychology – Exception to Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege for Board Investigations—OPPOSE
Dear Chair Berman and Chair Ashby,
Mental Health America of California (MHAC) would like to express opposition to the California Board of Psychology’s proposed exception to the psychotherapist-patient privilege in Board investigations (Proposal #1 of Section 10 of the Sunset Review Report, page 97) and request that proposal not move forward. The proposal would establish a psychotherapist-patient privilege exception for Board investigations.
MHAC is a peer-run organization leading the state in behavioral health public policy and advocacy since 1957. The mission of MHAC is to assist and encourage communities, families and individuals to experience hope, wellness and recovery from mental health and substance use disorder issues. The people and communities we aim to serve include those of all ages; sexual orientation, gender identity or expression; language, racial and ethnic backgrounds, national origin, and immigration status; spirituality and religious affiliations; or socioeconomic status. Our communities rely on the expectation of privacy when accessing mental health care.
Currently, if a patient refuses to disclose records in a Board investigation, the Board has recourse to obtain the records through a subpoena and obtain a civil court order to enforce the subpoena. This ensures that the Board demonstrates compelling interest that the disclosure of such records is relevant and material to the issue. This court process offers the Board an avenue to obtain records while upholding the psychotherapist’s duty to patient privilege and protecting the patient’s constitutional right to privacy.
Confidentiality is essential to successful psychotherapy because it allows for open dialogue between the Psychologist and the patient on extremely personal and sensitive issues. Patients rely on the expectation of privacy every time they attend a therapy session, and without the guarantee of privacy, patients will be less likely to be forthcoming with their therapist and possibly be less likely to seek care.
In addition, this proposal has the potential to severely undermine the quality and effectiveness of psychotherapy. If Psychotherapists fear that their client records could be seized without proper protections, this could result in less than accurate and potentially reductive work products.
The Board has reported that over the last four years it has had to close only three cases due to an inability to access records. The low number of cases being closed does not provide any significant or compelling arguments for a psychotherapist-patient privilege exception. It is for these reasons that MHAC asks you not to move forward with the Board’s proposal. If you have any questions, or if MHAC can provide any assistance on this issue or any behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me at hstrunk@mhac.org or our Director of Public Policy, Karen Vicari, at kvicari@mhaofca.org.
In Community,
Heidi L. Strunk
President & CEO
Cc: Honorable Members, Assembly Business and Professions Committee
Honorable Members, Senate Business and Professions and Economic Development Committee
Kaitlin Curry, Consultant, Assembly Business and Professions Committee
Anna Billy, Consultant, Senate Business and Professions and Economic Development Committee
