Stop Arbitrary Licensing Board Power and Retroactive Rulemaking

——————————

WHAT HAPPENED

My name is Scott Roberts. I practiced as a licensed physical therapist and massage therapist in Virginia for more than 20 years with:

• No prior disciplinary history
• No patient harm findings
• More than 110,000 patient treatments performed
• Longstanding physician referrals
• More than 300 patient statements supporting my care

Yet despite that record, my career and livelihood were effectively destroyed after I recommended pelvic floor therapy, a recognized area of physical therapy practice.

The accusations against me relied on:

• undefined standards,
• retroactive interpretations, and
• allegations contradicted by contemporaneous medical records, sworn testimony, objective evidence, and expert validation.

Even more alarming, the Virginia Board of Physical Therapy ultimately concluded that I was:

✅ Safe and competent
✅ Not responsible for patient harm
✅ Not proven to have violated standards of care

Yet the result was still:

❌ Multi-year suspension
❌ Severe ongoing restrictions
❌ Career destruction
❌ National reporting consequences

How can both be true?

If a provider is truly safe and competent and no violations were proven, why were unprecedented sanctions still imposed?

That contradiction is the core issue raised by this petition.

When oversight becomes disconnected from evidence, transparency, and consistently applied standards, every healthcare professional and every patient is at risk.

——————————

THIS SHOULD TERRIFY EVERY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL
If a licensing board can:

• reinterpret standards years after treatment occurred,
• apply undefined expectations retroactively,
• ignore expert testimony,
• disregard contemporaneous documentation,
• and still impose career-ending sanctions despite findings of safety and competence,

then no professional license is truly protected from arbitrary enforcement.

Not for:

• physical therapists
• nurses
• physicians
• psychologists
• chiropractors
• attorneys
• teachers
• or any professional governed by politically appointed boards

No citizen should lose their livelihood over standards that were never clearly defined at the time the treatment occurred.

——————————

TIMELINE OF EVENTS
Timeline                                               Event

20+ years                                              No disciplinary history

110,000+ treatments                   No patient harm findings

Complaints filed                              Not from patients who actually received pelvic floor therapy

Expert testimony                            Supported care and recommendations

Board findings                                   “Safe and competent”

Outcome                                               Multi-year suspension and severe restrictions

——————————

THE CENTRAL CONTRADICTION
The Board ultimately concluded:

✅ Safe and competent
✅ No patient harm
✅ No proven violations

Yet the outcome still included:

❌ Multi-year suspension
❌ Severe ongoing restrictions
❌ Destruction of livelihood
❌ National reporting consequences
❌ Loss of patient access to care

If findings of “safe and competent” are not enough to protect a professional license, then what is?

——————————

WHAT MAKES THIS CASE SO CONCERNING?

• No complaint was ever filed by a patient who actually received pelvic floor therapy from me
• More than 300 patient support statements were ignored
• Expert testimony from Dr. Holly Tanner validating the recommendations and treatment approach was disregarded
• Contemporaneous documentation contradicted key allegations
• Undefined standards were applied retroactively
• Severe sanctions remained despite findings of safety and competence
• Patients lost access to an experienced provider despite no finding of harm

This is not simply about one therapist.

It is about whether government agencies should have the power to destroy careers using standards that were never clearly defined beforehand.

——————————

IMAGINE THIS HAPPENING TO YOU
Imagine being told:

• you violated rules that did not clearly exist at the time,
• your documentation and evidence did not matter,
• expert witnesses supporting you could be ignored,
• and even after findings that you were “safe and competent,” your career could still be destroyed.

That is not how due process is supposed to work in America.

——————————

A PATTERN OF PROCEDURAL AND REGULATORY IRREGULARITIES

This case raises serious concerns regarding the conduct of the Virginia Board of Physical Therapy and the Virginia Department of Health Professions.

According to the record, the Board and associated agencies:

• Applied brand-new interpretations of professional standards retroactively to care provided years earlier
• Created requirements never clearly published for other therapists in Virginia
• Reimposed substantially identical sanctions after a court found due process violations
• Dismissed constitutional concerns as “minor technicalities”
• Failed to include the complete formal hearing transcript and exhibits in the official appellate record
• Allowed individuals involved in bringing charges to participate in deliberative processes
• Issued restrictive conditions that were never properly voted upon in open session
• Failed to respond to ongoing litigation filed in 2026, placing the Board in default

Investigators also admitted under oath that:

• Exculpatory evidence in their files for 8-19 monts remained unreviewed  
• Important medical records and consent documentation were omitted from investigative summaries
• Published investigative procedures and Administrative Process Act requirements were not consistently followed

These are not minor procedural concerns.

They strike at the integrity of the disciplinary process itself.

——————————

THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION THIS CASE PRESENTS

Can a licensing board label a lawful medical recommendation as “conduct of a sexual nature”  based solely on a  subjective discomfort:

• When no expert testimony supports that conclusion,
• When the only qualified expert who testified (Dr. Holly Tanner) confirmed the care was within the standard of practice,
• When the medical records contradict the allegations,
• When patients voluntarily sought and consented to treatment,
• And when the Board itself later concludes there were no violations and no patient harm?

If the answer is yes, then professional discipline is no longer tied to objective standards.

• It becomes tied to shifting interpretations, selective enforcement, and subjective opinion.

That should concern every licensed professional in Virginia.

——————————

WHY THIS MATTERS NOW
Healthcare professionals across the country are increasingly subjected to unclear standards, inconsistent enforcement, and politically influenced disciplinary systems.

If evidence, documentation, and findings of safety are no longer enough to protect a professional license, then due process protections become meaningless in practice.

Oversight is necessary.

But oversight without accountability becomes arbitrary power.

 ——————————

WHY THIS MATTERS TO PATIENTS

Patients lose when experienced providers are removed from practice despite findings of safety and competence.

Patients lose:

• Access to experienced clinicians
• Continuity of care
• The ability to make informed healthcare decisions for themselves
• The right to continue treatment with trusted providers
• Meaningful healthcare choice

Pelvic health patients already face major provider shortages and long wait times for care.

When unclear standards and inconsistent enforcement drive experienced clinicians out of practice, patients are left with fewer options and reduced access to care.

Competent adults should retain the right to participate in informed healthcare decisions, including:

• Whether to continue care with a trusted provider
• Whether to accept or decline the presence of a chaperone 
• Whether to consent to lawful evidence-based treatment
• The right and dignity as a competent adult to give informed consent regarding their own care
• Care guided by evidence, informed consent, and established standards of practice

Instead, this case resulted in mandatory restrictions patients themselves cannot decline, despite no findings of patient harm and no violations.

That is not patient-centered care.

That is administrative control replacing patient autonomy.

——————————

THE BROADER DANGER

Healthcare professionals across the country are increasingly subjected to unclear standards, inconsistent enforcement, and politically influenced disciplinary systems.

This case raises a troubling question:

• How can professionals comply with standards that were never clearly defined in the first place?

According to the proceedings:

• No clearly published regulation defined the treatment standard at issue
• No clear statewide definition existed for what constituted pelvic floor therapy
• No consistently applied chaperone standard existed
• No uniform framework governed the discipline ultimately imposed
• Yet severe sanctions were still enforced.

That creates a dangerous precedent for every professional regulated by administrative boards.

Because when undefined standards become enforceable after the fact, compliance becomes impossible.

And when compliance becomes impossible, administrative power becomes effectively limitless.

——————————

THE PROCEEDINGS RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY

• Ignore unrebutted expert testimony (including Dr. Holly Tanner, the only qualified pelvic specialist)
• Ignore medical records and sworn testimony
• Ignore positive patient outcomes
• Ignore evidence-based research 
• Ignore their own “no harm, no violation” findings
• And still impose severe career-altering discipline

That should concern every licensed professional and every patient who depends upon one.

——————————

WHAT WE ARE ASKING VIRGINIA LEADERS TO DO

We respectfully ask Virginia lawmakers, courts, and regulatory agencies to:

1. REQUIRE clearly published professional standards before discipline may occur.
2. PREVENT retroactive reinterpretation of undefined standards.
3. ENSURE disciplinary findings remain tied to evidence and factual conclusions.
4. REQUIRE meaningful consideration of expert testimony, medical records, and patient outcomes.
5. CONDUCT independent reviews when severe restrictions remain despite findings of safety and competence.
6. PROTECT informed adult patients’ right to participate in healthcare decisions.
7. STRENGTHEN transparency and accountability within professional disciplinary systems.

If a licensing board can find a provider safe and competent, find no violations and no patient harm, yet still impose severe restrictions under undefined standards, then no licensed professional is truly secure and no patient’s choice is truly protected.

——————————

A SYSTEM SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DESTROY A CAREER WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY FINDING A PROVIDER “SAFE AND COMPETENT.” 

If this can happen to one healthcare professional, it can happen to others.

Please sign and share this petition to support:

• Due process
• Transparent healthcare regulation
• Patient autonomy
• Evidence-based oversight
• Protection against arbitrary licensing enforcement

Share it with:

• Healthcare professionals
• Patients
• Journalists
• Civil liberties advocates
• Lawmakers
• Attorneys
• Anyone concerned about government accountability and due process 

Because when discipline becomes untethered from evidence, clearly defined standards, and factual findings, every licensed professional becomes vulnerable and every patient’s access to care becomes less secure.

Scott Roberts, PT, LMT

Virginia Licensed Physical Therapist & Massage Therapist