Michigan Therapist and Counselor Sexual Exploitation Attorney

If you are asking yourself whether you consented, Michigan law has already answered that question. MCL 333.16221(e)(vi) makes it unprofessional conduct for a licensee to engage in:

“Any conduct by a licensee … with a patient while the licensee … is acting within the health profession for which the licensee … is licensed, including conduct initiated by a patient or to which the patient consents, that is sexual or may reasonably be interpreted as sexual, including, but not limited to, sexual intercourse, kissing in a sexual manner, or touching of a body part for any purpose other than appropriate examination or treatment.”

The duty to hold that line belonged to the licensee, and it does not lift because a patient started it or agreed to it. A therapy relationship gives one person detailed knowledge of another’s history, diagnosis, and circumstances, held under a duty, which is why the rule reads the way it does.

Vahdat Weisman Law sexual assault attorneys represent people harmed by sexual exploitation in therapy across Michigan. Call (734) 469-4994 for a free, confidential consultation. No attorney fee unless we recover for you.

Can What Happened Be a Crime in Michigan?

Michigan has no dedicated psychotherapist-patient offense, as many states do. It has a line of published decisions applying general statutes to therapists.

MCL 750.520b(1)(f) reaches sexual penetration where the actor causes personal injury and force or coercion is used. Subdivision (1)(f)(iv) supplies one qualifying form: “When the actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the victim in a manner or for purposes that are medically recognized as unethical or unacceptable.” Parallel language appears in the second- and third-degree provisions.

Psychotherapy counts as “medical treatment” for that purpose (People v Regts, 219 Mich App 294, 296-298 (1996)), and second-degree convictions against a therapist have been upheld on that ground (People v Alter, 255 Mich App 194 (2003)). The same form of coercion reaches a psychiatrist under the third-degree provision, MCL 750.520d(1)(b) (People v Bayer, 280 Mich App 135 (2008)). People v. Baisden, 482 Mich 1000 (2008), overruled earlier decisions to the extent they required medical testimony in every such prosecution and confined the provision to cases where treatment was a mere pretext for consent. And People v. Levran, published in 2024, held the standard jury instruction wrong insofar as it required that the treatment itself be conducted for a sexual purpose.

They also reach conduct where the actor knows or has reason to know that the person is mentally incapable, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless, terms MCL 750.520a defines specifically.

MCL 750.90, as amended effective October 10, 2023, makes it a felony for “an individual who undertakes medical treatment of a patient” to misrepresent that sexual contact or penetration is medically necessary and thereby induce participation, with maximums of 20 and 25 years. No Michigan appellate court has squarely addressed how it applies to psychotherapy. Whether a charge is brought is the prosecutor’s decision, and your civil claim and licensing complaint do not depend on one.

What You Can Do, and In What Order

A complaint to the licensing agency. Michigan’s Bureau of Professional Licensing within LARA handles complaints against psychologists, social workers, licensed professional counselors, and marriage and family therapists, each licensed under Article 15 of the Public Health Code, and a disciplinary proceeding can suspend or revoke a license. What you write there becomes a statement that can be compared against your later testimony, a reason to have help preparing it rather than to delay filing.

A civil claim is the route that can provide compensation, and the one in which the employing clinic, hospital, or agency can be brought in. A report to law enforcement fits conduct that may fall under a criminal provision above. These can proceed together, and the sequencing matters.

Each profession also prohibits the conduct in its own ethics code; the National Association of Social Workers standard bars sexual contact with current clients “whether such contact is consensual or forced,” though those codes are private and Michigan’s standard remains the provision quoted above.

Which Claim You Have, and How Long You Have

Michigan characterizes the same conduct differently depending on how it is pleaded, and the deadlines differ substantially.

The malpractice track carries procedural requirements that end a claim if they are missed. MCL 600.2912b requires written notice of intent with specified contents before the action is commenced. Its 182-day waiting period is a general rule, not a fixed number: 154 days where the defendant does not give the required written response, 91 days for certain defendants identified later in an existing action, and sooner if the recipient states in writing that it will not settle. The notice adds no free time, because MCL 600.5856(c) tolling operates within the period already allowed. MCL 600.2912d requires an affidavit of merit from a health professional, filed with the complaint.

MCL 600.5827 sets the general accrual rule that a claim accrues when the wrong was done. MCL 600.5838a(1) provides that a malpractice claim accrues at the act or omission regardless of when it was discovered, and subsection (2) fixes the outer boundary: the limitations period, or six months after discovery or constructive discovery, whichever is later, ordinarily not more than six years after the act or omission, subject to exceptions including fraudulent concealment. That six-year provision is a cutoff, not extra time.

You do not get to choose which of these applies. Characterization is decided by the court, using the two-part test from Bryant v Oakpointe Villa Nursing Center, 471 Mich 411 (2004): whether the claim pertains to an action within the course of a professional relationship, and whether it raises questions of medical judgment beyond common knowledge and experience. A court must look past a complaint’s labels to the gravamen of each allegation (Trowell v Providence Hospital & Medical Centers, Inc., 502 Mich 509 (2018)). The malpractice track reaches further than the word “doctor” suggests: Roberts v Salmi, 308 Mich App 605 (2014), published, observed that the Legislature extended the definition of medical malpractice to licensed professional counselors, citing MCL 600.5838a(1)(b) and MCL 333.18101.

There is an argument that allegations of sexual exploitation fail the second Bryant question, because whether a therapist may engage in sexual conduct with a client is not a question of medical judgment beyond common knowledge. It has to be worked out against Roberts, allegation by allegation, and the periods do not line up the way it assumes: assault and battery carry the same two years as malpractice. Because getting characterization wrong is fatal, these cases are pleaded in the alternative.

Who Else May Be Responsible

The therapist is rarely the only responsible party, and often not the one with insurance. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to adopt the aided-by-the-agency exception, holding that an employer is not liable for torts an employee intentionally commits beyond the scope of its business (Zsigo v Hurley Medical Center, 475 Mich 215 (2006)). Conduct for the employee’s own purposes ordinarily falls outside that scope, so the institution is reached through its own conduct: negligent hiring, retention and supervision.

Michigan requires reasonable care in hiring and retention, with liability turning on whether the employer knew or should have known facts showing a relevant dangerous propensity; even a violent criminal record does not automatically establish negligent hiring (Hersh v Kentfield Builders, Inc., 385 Mich 410 (1971)). Lewd comments alone did not make a rape reasonably foreseeable absent a prior criminal or violent history or an unmistakable particularized threat (Brown v Brown, 478 Mich 545 (2007)). Hamed v. Wayne County, 490 Mich. 1 (2011), relies on both and framed foreseeability around actual or constructive knowledge of prior similar conduct and of the employee’s propensity to act on it. So these claims turn on what the organization knew: prior complaints, prior licensing actions, an internal report closed without action.

If your therapist worked for a community mental health services program, governmental immunity enters but does not end it. MCL 330.1205 preserves specified immunities when a county program becomes a community mental health authority, and MCL 691.1407 governs governmental agencies and their employees. Subsection (4) provides that the act does not grant immunity to a governmental agency or to an officer, employee, or agent of one “with respect to providing medical care or treatment to a patient,” subject to stated exceptions for state-operated hospitals and facilities and for corrections settings. That exception has been applied to a community mental health entity, and held broad enough to cover treatment for mental illness or behavioral disorders (McLean v McElhaney, 289 Mich App 592 (2010)). Private agencies under such a contract are not governmental agencies at all, so identifying the employing entity is an early step.

Coverage is a separate question. Professional liability policies are not uniform: some exclude intentional acts, some address sexual misconduct through a sublimit or defense costs only. The only answer comes from finding the policies and reading them, and coverage may not exist at all.

What Helps Your Case

Keep everything that documents the relationship and its timeline: texts, emails, appointment and billing records, session notes you were given. Request your treatment records in writing before anyone knows a claim is coming. Continue or begin care with a different provider if you are able. Do not confront the therapist, and do not sign anything a clinic presents.

Why Choose Vahdat Weisman Law?

These cases turn on characterization, because a claim pleaded only as malpractice is subject to the MCL 600.2912b notice and MCL 600.2912d affidavit requirements and the shorter period in MCL 600.5838a. They also turn on identifying the employing entity, how the medical care exception in MCL 691.1407(4) applies if it is governmental, and what coverage exists. We handle these matters with the discretion they require.

From our Livonia office, we represent clients throughout Michigan. Founding partners Kara E. Weisman and Jordan S. Vahdat have each been honored as Super Lawyers Rising Stars. Our attorneys are members of the State Bar of Michigan and active in the Michigan Association for Justice. We advance case costs, we work in English and Spanish, and we are available 24/7.

Frequently Asked Questions

• I was an adult, and I did not say no. Does that mean I consented? Michigan’s licensing standard makes the conduct a violation “including conduct initiated by a patient or to which the patient consents.” The professional’s obligation to hold the boundary does not depend on what you did.
• Will filing a complaint make it public? Licensing proceedings and their outcomes are generally part of a public regulatory record, though what is published varies by stage. Civil cases have their own procedures for protecting a party’s identity, and we can tell you what is realistic in your case.
• It happened five years ago. Is it too late? It depends on how the claim is characterized, and the court decides that, not the wording of a complaint. A claim for damages sustained because of criminal sexual conduct carries ten years with no requirement that anyone was charged, while a malpractice framing carries two years, or six months from discovery, with a six-year cutoff.

About the Author

Kara E. Weisman is a founding partner of Vahdat Weisman Law in Livonia and handles medical malpractice, wrongful death, civil rights, and personal injury claims. She clerked at the Ingham County Probate Court and for the Federal Defender’s Office for the Eastern District of Michigan, and is admitted in all Michigan state courts and in the Eastern and Western Districts of Michigan.

Talk to a Michigan Therapist Misconduct Lawyer

If a therapist, counselor, psychologist, or social worker engaged in sexual conduct with you during or after treatment, call Vahdat Weisman Law at (734) 469-4994 or contact us online. The conversation is free and confidential. Available 24/7, serving all of Michigan, with Spanish-speaking staff. See also our doctor sexual assault page.

Dedicated to Justice. Devoted to You. Winning for Your Future.

Reviewed by Kara E. Weisman, Vahdat Weisman Law. Last reviewed September 2026.

This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique, and prior results do not guarantee future success.