If a Licensing Board Can Ignore Its Own Findings, No Professional Is Truly Protected

——————————

WHAT HAPPENED

Imagine spending decades building a career, helping thousands of patients, maintaining a clean record, documenting informed consent, following accepted professional education, and believing that evidence and due process still matter.

Then imagine a licensing board concluding:

• No patient harm occurred
• No violations were found
• You were “safe and competent” to practice

…yet still keeping severe, career-damaging restrictions in place anyway.

That is exactly what happened in my case before the Virginia Board of Physical Therapy.

My name is Scott Roberts. I practiced as a licensed Virginia physical therapist and massage therapist for 20 years, with over 110,000 patient visits, and no prior complaints or disciplinary history.  

Before these proceedings, I had: 

• No prior disciplinary history.
• No findings of patient harm.
• Documented informed consent.
• Positive patient outcomes.
• Longstanding physician referral.
• More than 300 patient statements supporting my care.
• Unrebutted expert testimony supporting my competence.

Yet I remained suspended for more than four years under standards that were never clearly defined or consistently applied.

The Virginia Board of Physical Therapy still imposed:

• A SUSPENSION EXCEEDING FOUR YEARS 
• INDEFINITE PROBATION
• PERMANENT PRACTICE RESTRICTIONS 
• NATIONAL REPORTING AFFECTING MY PROFESSIONAL FUTURE 

Then — after years of proceedings— the Board itself ultimately acknowledged:

✅SAFE AND COMPETENT

✅NO VIOLATIONS FOUND

✅NO PATIENT HARM FOUND

✅DOCUMENTED INFORMED CONSENT 

✅POSITIVE OUTCOMES

✅UNREBUTTED EXPERT SUPPORT

SAME RECORD.
SAME FACTS.
DIFFERENT OUTCOME.

Even after acknowledging safety, competence, and no patient harm, the Board still maintained severe restrictions.

——————————

WHY THIS SHOULD CONCERN EVERY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL

This petition is not simply about one provider or one profession.

It is about whether any licensed professional can safely practice when:

• Standards are unclear
• Rules are reinterpreted after the fact
• Discipline becomes disconnected from factual findings
• Career-ending restrictions remain despite findings of safety and competence

Because if this can happen under undefined standards, it can happen to anyone governed by a professional licensing board.

This case raises serious concerns about the exercise of administrative power without clearly established standards.

Patients voluntarily sought and consented to the treatment at issue.

• They benefited from care.
• They wished to continue treatment.
• Competent adults gave informed consent.

Not one single patient who received the treatment filed a complaint. 

Yet severe restrictions remained, including mandatory chaperone conditions patients themselves cannot decline.

At the center of this issue is a troubling reality:

• No clearly published regulation defined the treatment standard at issue
• No clear definition existed for what constituted “pelvic floor therapy”
• No clearly established chaperone standard existed
• No consistently applied framework governed the discipline imposed

This creates a dangerous situation for every licensed professional:

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

Additional concerns also arose regarding inconsistent jurisdictional treatment, conflicting professional standards across agencies, and the handling of medical documentation during the proceedings.

For example, treatment provided within a physical therapy context was later evaluated under a separate professional framework with different scope limitations and standards, creating significant questions regarding jurisdiction, consistency of review, and application of professional standards across agencies.

These issues further highlight the need for clearly defined regulations, transparent procedures, and consistent evidentiary review in professional disciplinary actions.

——————————

WHY THIS SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT

This case is not isolated.

It sets a precedent relevant to anyone holding a professional license — physical therapists, physicians, nurses, dentists, occupational therapists, chiropractors, pharmacists, massage therapists, you name it.

If unelected, politically appointed government agencies can:

• Reinterpret standards after the fact
• Disregard clear evidence
• Discount expert testimony
• Acknowledge no patient harm occurred
• Acknowledge safety and competence

…and still impose severe, career-altering discipline, then every licensed professional becomes vulnerable to inconsistent enforcement.

Clinical judgment, professional reputation, patient relationships, and livelihoods all depend upon predictable and consistently applied standards.

——————————

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

Every competent adult 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 
• The right and dignity as a competent adult to give informed consent regarding their own care
• Care guided by evidence and the standard of practice  

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 choices and reduced access to care.

—————————— 

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ELIMINATING PROFESSIONAL OVERSIGHT

Effective oversight protects patients and ethical professionals alike.

Professional standards matter.

Accountability matters.

But oversight loses legitimacy when discipline becomes disconnected from evidence, transparency, and consistently applied standards.

This petition asks a simple question:

• Can a government licensing board impose severe, career-altering discipline under standards that were never clearly established, even after concluding there were no violations, no patient harm, and that the provider was safe and competent?

If the answer is yes, then licensed professionals cannot reliably know what standards actually govern their practice.

Justice requires:

• Evidence over assumption
• Consistency over selective enforcement
• Transparency over retroactive reinterpretation
• Accountability grounded in factual findings

Because once evidence no longer constrains administrative power, the predictability and fairness professionals rely upon begin to disappear.

——————————

THE VIRGINIA BOARDS AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH PROFESSIONS PROVED THEY CAN: 

• 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.

——————————

WE ASK VIRGINIA LEADERS TO ACT

We are asking Virginia lawmakers 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.

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.

——————————

TAKE ACTION  

Please sign and share this petition to support:

• Fairness
• Transparency
• Evidence-based oversight
• Patient choice
• Accountability grounded in objective evidence

Share it with healthcare professionals, patients, advocates, and lawmakers.

When discipline becomes untethered from clearly defined standards and factual findings, licensed professionals become vulnerable and patient access to care becomes less secure.

Scott Roberts, PT, LMT

Virginia Licensed Physical Therapist & Massage Therapist