THEY OFFICIALLY DETERMINED I WAS "SAFE TO PRACTICE." 

They found I caused no patient harm.

They concluded I committed no violations.

Then they imposed career-altering restrictions anyway.

If that sounds impossible, keep reading.

Because if a government agency can do this to one licensed professional, it can happen to anyone whose career depends upon government exercising its power fairly.

——————————

MY STORY ISN'T UNIQUE. THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

For twenty years, I practiced as a Virginia-licensed physical therapist and licensed massage therapist.

During that time I:

• Provided more than 110,000 patient treatments
• Maintained physician referrals throughout my career
• Had no prior disciplinary history
• Earned the trust of thousands of patients
• Received more than 300 statements of support from patients and healthcare professionals

I believed that if I practiced ethically, documented carefully, respected my patients, and followed the law, the system would protect both patients and professionals.

I was wrong.

Everything changed after I recommended pelvic floor physical therapy, a recognized area of physical therapy practice that the Virginia Board itself authorizes through approved continuing education.

The process that followed removed me from practice for more than four years.

But that is only part of the story.

——————————

WHAT HAPPENED SHOULD CONCERN EVERY AMERICAN

An independent review of the record raises serious questions about how governmental power was exercised throughout my case.

One of the nation's leading pelvic health physical therapists, Dr. Holly Tanner, reviewed the patient records and disciplinary materials.

Her conclusion was clear:

"I see nothing to indicate that Mr. Roberts did anything that was clinically inappropriate or outside the prevailing standard of care among physical therapists."

She further concluded that nothing she reviewed suggested I could not safely and competently practice.

Then something extraordinary happened.

At my reinstatement hearing, the Virginia Board of Physical Therapy itself concluded that I was:

✅ Safe to practice.

✅ Competent to practice.

✅ Responsible for no patient harm.

✅ Guilty of no violations.

Despite those findings, the Board still imposed:

❌ Indefinite probation to "control me"

❌ Significant practice restrictions

❌ National reporting consequences that continue to damage my career

That raises a question far bigger than my case:

• If a government agency determines someone is safe, competent, and responsible for no patient harm, how can it justify imposing career-altering restrictions anyway?

That question deserves an answer.

Not because of me.

Because government accountability matters to everyone.

——————————

THE ORIGINAL CHARGES ALSO FAILED EVERY LEGAL TEST

The original discipline itself collapsed under the law.

On every single charge, the Board had a clear legal job to do — and failed it:

• They suspended my license after a 46-minute phone call without ever proving the immediate “substantial danger” the law requires for emergency action.
• They labeled the care “sexual” or “lewd” even after their own witnesses — including the patients — testified under oath that there was zero sexual connotation.
• They ignored clear written and verbal consent that was documented in the treatment records.
• They claimed anatomically impossible contact that the patient’s own sworn testimony (fully clothed, legs together, therapist at the foot of the table, never went between my legs) made physically impossible.
• They punished me for recommending pelvic floor therapy after a patient disclosed urinary incontinence — even though recommending appropriate care is not only lawful, it is required professional conduct.
• They imposed a blanket ban on an entire specialty that produced zero complaints from any patient who actually received that care over 20+ years and 110,000+ encounters.
• They blocked my expert witnesses on anatomy, clinical standards, and consent, then acted as their own unchallengeable experts on highly specialized questions.
• They disregarded contemporaneous treatment notes and more than 300 patient support letters.

This is not how professional discipline is supposed to work.

The Board failed to meet a single statutory, evidentiary, or procedural requirement for any allegation.

——————————

THE BOARD ABANDONED NEUTRALITY

Virginia law requires the Board to function as a neutral adjudicator — the equivalent of an impartial jury. Separate investigators and a regional prosecutor handle the state’s case.

The Board’s only job is to listen and decide fairly.

The hearing transcripts show the Board repeatedly abandoned that role and acted instead as an extension of the prosecution:

• When counsel asked the Board on the record to state the burden of proof, the Board refused and simply said, “We note your position. We are going to go ahead.” By declining to define the legal standard, the Board preserved unlimited discretion to reach a predetermined result.
• Conflicted actors were allowed to influence the process and closed-session deliberations:
  • An Assistant Attorney General who was simultaneously defending the Board’s prior actions in the Court of Appeals,
  • An Executive Director who had previously taken a position favoring revocation,
  • Prior adjudicators who had already ruled against me on the same facts in 2022 and 2023 that were involved in violating my due process rights (won in circuit court).
• Board members engaged in (or tolerated) prosecutorial patterns:
  • Leading questions that assumed guilt,
  • Interrupting and arguing with answers,
  • Expanding beyond the formal charges, and
  • Using a hostile or sarcastic tone.
• The Board preferred the investigator’s years-old filtered notes over live testimony from the primary witness who was physically present and available for cross-examination.
• When that primary witness’s testimony substantially collapsed under cross-examination — confirming the treatment helped, that she had declined chaperones, and that contemporaneous records contradicted her later account — the Board ignored the collapse and continued relying on the original narrative.

A Board that refuses to state the rules, allows conflicted actors to participate, takes over the prosecutor’s role, prefers controllable hearsay, and closes its eyes to devastating live evidence is not a neutral tribunal.

It is an arm of the prosecution.

Under the Virginia Administrative Process Act, these are classic grounds for finding the proceeding fundamentally unfair.

——————————

THE ULTIMATE REGULATORY TRAP

The proceedings also exposed another troubling issue.

The Board acknowledged it had:

❌ No written definition of what constitutes "pelvic floor therapy."

❌ No written regulation defining what constitutes a "chaperone."

Despite the absence of written standards, I was required to comply with undefined conditions not applied to other practitioners—including mandatory chaperones that stripped patients of their right to decline.

The same underlying physical therapy care was also used to discipline my separate massage therapy license—resulting in dramatically different outcomes from two different boards for the identical clinical encounter.

——————————

WHO HOLDS THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE?

When concerns regarding the disciplinary process were brought to the Director of the Virginia Department of Health Professions, his response was as troubling as the allegations themselves:

"There is nothing I can do because the boards are politically appointed."

Whether intended or not, that response highlights a troubling question.

Who holds a licensing board accountable when serious concerns are raised about the board's own conduct?

Licensing boards possess extraordinary governmental power. They can:

• ❌Suspend licenses
• ❌Restrict careers
• ❌Damage reputations
• ❌Affect livelihoods

Authority of that magnitude requires equally meaningful accountability.

This case exposes a deeper problem: licensing boards wield extraordinary power over livelihoods with insufficient oversight, transparency, and accountability.

Government must follow the law when it enforces the law.

——————————

THIS PETITION ISN’T ABOUT ONE PHYSICAL THERAPIST

It is about whether government agencies must follow the same laws, standards of evidence, transparency, and constitutional protections they demand from the citizens they regulate.

Every licensed professional places their livelihood in the hands of a government agency.

Every patient places their trust in the integrity of that system.

Both deserve better.

——————————

THE REFORMS WE SEEK

We urge the Virginia General Assembly, the Department of Health Professions, licensing boards, and national organizations to adopt these common-sense reforms:

ESTABLISH CLEAR STANDARDS BEFORE DISCIPLINE

• No professional should be disciplined for violating standards that were never clearly written, publicly available, and established before the conduct occurred.

• Government cannot fairly enforce rules that do not exist.

END RETROACTIVE ENFORCEMENT

• Professionals should be judged according to the law and standards that existed when care was provided, not by later interpretations or unwritten expectations.

• Government should enforce the law as written, not as later reimagined.

RESTORE MEANINGFUL DUE PROCESS

• Every licensee deserves a fair, impartial, and transparent hearing where all relevant evidence, expert testimony, and exculpatory information receive meaningful consideration.
• Due process is a constitutional guarantee, not a technicality.

CREATE INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

• No agency should investigate, prosecute, and judge its own cases.

• Cases involving severe sanctions, lengthy suspensions, or significant restrictions on professional practice should receive independent review to ensure fairness, consistency, and accountability.

REQUIRE EVIDENCE-BASED DECISION MAKING

• Disciplinary decisions must be supported by objective evidence contained in the record.

• Opinions, assumptions, and unwritten expectations should never replace documented facts or established standards of practice.

INCREASE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

• Public confidence depends upon transparency.

• Disciplinary proceedings, investigative practices, voting procedures, and appellate records should be conducted in a manner that promotes accountability and allows meaningful public review.

PRIORITIZE REMEDIATION OVER CAREER DESTRUCTION

• When public safety is not at risk, professional regulation should emphasize education, remediation, and rehabilitation before imposing unnecessarily career-ending sanctions.
• The purpose of regulation is to protect the public, not simply to punish professionals.

PROTECT PATIENT AUTONOMY

• Competent adults have the right to informed consent, privacy, and participation in their own healthcare decisions, including the ability to decline a chaperone.

• Regulatory policies should protect informed consent, patient privacy, and access to qualified providers while maintaining appropriate safeguards for patient safety.

PRESERVE PROFESSIONAL BOUNDARIES

• Each licensing board should regulate only the profession entrusted to its authority.
• Care provided under one license should not trigger discipline under another.

HOLD GOVERNMENT TO THE SAME STANDARD

• Licensing boards demand accountability from professionals and must demonstrate the same.
• Government earns public trust not simply by enforcing the law, but by demonstrating that it is equally bound by it.

REQUIRE CONSISTENT DISCIPLINARY STANDARDS

• Similar conduct should result in reasonably consistent disciplinary outcomes.
• When substantially different sanctions are imposed for comparable conduct, agencies should explain the factual and legal basis for those differences to ensure public confidence in the fairness and consistency of professional regulation.
• Because government agencies should be held to the same standards of accountability they expect from the professionals they regulate.

Government must follow the law when it enforces the law.

——————————

WHY YOUR SIGNATURE MATTERS

This petition is not asking you to decide my legal case—the courts will handle that.

It asks something much larger:

Should any government agency have the power to take away a person's livelihood without being held to the same standards of fairness, transparency, accountability, evidence, and due process that they demand from the professionals they regulate.

• Every licensed professional trusts their career to a government agency.

• Every patient trusts the system meant to protect them.

That trust depends upon one fundamental principle:

• Government must follow the law when it enforces the law.

If you believe:

✅ Government agencies must be accountable for their actions

✅ Due process should never depend upon who you are or what profession you hold

✅ Professional discipline should be based upon objective evidence, not unwritten rules

✅ Patients deserve both safe care and fair regulation

✅ Public officials should face meaningful oversight

✅ Constitutional protections should apply equally to everyone

Then please sign this petition and share it with:

✅ Healthcare professionals

✅ Patients

✅ Attorneys

✅ Lawmakers

✅ Journalists

✅ Civil liberties organizations

✅ Anyone who believes government power requires accountability

This petition is about more than one therapist.

It is about protecting every licensed professional and every citizen from arbitrary government action.

——————————

PROTECT PATIENTS.

PROTECT DUE PROCESS.

PROTECT PROFESSIONAL INTEGRITY.

PROTECT THE RULE OF LAW.

Government must follow the law when it enforces the law.

Scott Roberts, PT, LMT

Virginia Licensed Physical Therapist & Licensed Massage Therapist 

——————————

MEDIA INQUIRIES

Scott Roberts, PT, LMT

Email: scott@robertspt.com

Supporting documentation, expert declarations, and additional materials are available upon request.