September 2, 2025 • 31 mins
Behind every psychologist’s dedication to clients lies a professional risk that many underestimate until it’s too late: board oversight. As licensed psychologist and practicing attorney Dr. Brian Russell explains in this powerful episode, the difference between protecting your license and losing it often comes down to having the right legal support at the right moment.
For psychologists, the regulatory environment carries unique vulnerabilities. Unlike other professions where missteps might only result in reputational damage, psychologists answer to regulatory boards with the authority to suspend or end their practice entirely. This can be especially challenging with a common misconception floating around: many psychologists mistakenly view their licensing boards as professional associations there to provide support and assistance. In reality, these boards function as regulatory enforcement agencies, focused on identifying compliance violations, not advocating for practitioners.
Discover crucial insights for safeguarding your license as a psychologist throughout our conversation. We examine why attempting to respond to a complaint on your own, even if you believe you’ve done nothing wrong, can quickly escalate into serious consequences. Dr. Russell sheds light on the risks of relying on AI tools for regulatory advice, the necessity of carrying strong professional liability insurance, and the critical importance of working with an attorney who understands both the law and the realities of psychological practice. Most importantly, he shares step-by-step guidance on what to do the moment a complaint letter arrives. These actions that could determine whether your case is resolved quickly or spirals into a drawn-out investigation.
Whether you’re early in your career or a seasoned practitioner, we offer essential knowledge for protecting both your license and your livelihood. The regulatory landscape grows more complex every year, but with the right preparation and legal support, you can practice with confidence. Subscribe to Know Your Regulator for more strategies and insights to help navigate the world of professional regulation with clarity and security!
Get more information, details and resources on Know Your Regulator - https://www.belolaw.com/know-your-regulator
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
This podcast is for educational purposes only, does
not constitute legal advice anddoes not create an
attorney-client relationship.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
If you need legal assistance about a legal problem
contact an attorney.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Welcome back to Know your Regulator the podcast that
inspires you to engage.
I am your host, simone Murphy,and today we're diving into a
topic that affects everyhealthcare professional, whether
you are newly licensed oryou've been practicing for
decades.
We're talking about the valueof having the right legal
support, specifically, howcrucial it is to find attorneys
(00:33):
who understand the regulatoryworld that healthcare
professionals live in.
Joining me is someone whoembodies that dual expertise Dr
Brian Russell, a licensedpsychologist and a practicing
attorney with a deepunderstanding of the pressures
and the pitfalls that licenseholders face.
Brian, thank you for being heretoday.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Thank you for having me.
It's a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
So let's start with setting the scene for our
viewers.
Can you talk about what makesholding a professional license
different from working in othertypes of careers?
Speaker 2 (01:04):
makes holding a professional license, different
from working in other types ofcareers.
Yeah, being a member of aregulated profession has its
pros and its cons.
I mean, when you have to get alicense to do what you do, it
does create barriers to entryfor other people, to not just
anyone can then come into thefield.
However, it does add a layer ofcomplexity to doing the work.
(01:29):
It adds a layer of oversightthat you have to be conscious of
all the time how what you'redoing might be interpreted by
the regulatory board thatoversees your profession.
Where other professions painters, house painters don't have that
, don't have to worry aboutgetting a license to do it,
(01:51):
unless maybe they just need ageneral business license or
something in the state.
But generally you know thatwould be an example of a
profession where you know theycould do a good job or not so
good of a job, and that's justgoing to affect how many people
want to use them in the futuremaybe and what kind of reviews
they might get on Google.
But there's not going to bethis risk that a bunch of other
(02:14):
painters who have gotten onpainting licensing board are
going to say you know, youdidn't measure up to the
regulations governing thepainting profession in our state
, and so we're going to takeaway your ability to keep
painting, and so it does createa layer of concern that a
licensed professional has tohave really at all times when
(02:36):
they're practicing theirprofessions.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Yeah, no, that's very well said and I think that
sometimes license holders justaren't aware of that.
Like you said, that's kind ofwhat separates them.
They're held to a higherstandard.
Not just everyone can jump intothis profession.
There's some boxes that need tobe checked and some education
that needs to happen before.
Another trend I kind of seegoing on is a lot of tools like
(03:05):
AI models or chat GPT are beingused to understand the rules and
regulations that governlicenses, which that can give
you information.
But is it correct, is itfactual, is it up to date, and
does it even apply to yourparticular situation?
Can you talk about what kind ofmisunderstandings that you may
(03:26):
often see when license holdersare trying to handle these
regulatory issues with justgeneral legal advice or poor
legal advice?
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Yeah, it's interesting because with AI, I
think there are multiple layersof concerns.
One of them is that puttinginformation into an AI platform
often causes the person to haveto think about am I putting in
anything that would beconfidential information that
(03:59):
might then become part of adatabase someplace or might sort
of live in the cloud someplacethat isn't under my control
anymore, and so essentially whatI've done is I have made an
unauthorized disclosure of theprivate information of a patient
or a client and then, even ifthat's taken care of and that's
(04:21):
not the case still it's notinfallible and my understanding
of it and I'm not a tech expertby any means, but my
understanding of it is it'sreally only as good as the data
that it has access to, thedatabase of information that it
has access to, and so it looksfor similar things that are in
(04:42):
the database and things thathave basically been done in the
past and it tries to match thoseup with what's being asked of
it today, and so you know it issusceptible to bringing back a
result that is not reallyapplicable to the current
(05:03):
problem really applicable to thecurrent problem.
So, for example, myunderstanding is that if you
needed to find the length of thehypotenuse of a right triangle
and you asked AI to do that andyou gave the AI the lengths of
the two perpendicular sides.
It would look for the ways inwhich people have solved that
(05:24):
problem in the past and it wouldfind the Pythagorean theorem
and it would put in the lengthsof the two perpendicular sides
as a squared and b squared andthen it would come up with the c
squared, the hypotenuse.
But if it didn't have access tothe Pythagorean theorem, if it
couldn't find that anywhere forsome reason, it wouldn't be able
(05:44):
to derive the Pythagoreantheorem the way that.
Pythagoras did thousands ofyears ago, and then come up with
the solution to the problem,and so who knows what answer it
might give in that case, and soso you still have to look at
anything that it might spit backat you and and really really do
(06:08):
a reasonableness test to that.
Does it really reasonably fitthe situation I'm in?
So you kind of have two layersof of concern there, the
accuracy being being sort of thesecond one, and the first one
being am I going to put anythingin that is confidential?
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Yeah, no, I think it's, and it's just being it's
kind of blowing up right now,being very widely used.
And I wanted to touch on thatbecause so often we see a lot of
you know, potential new clientsor you know just people with
general legal issues who havesaid hey, I've gone on chat GPT
and this is what it gave me, andoftentimes it's not correct.
(06:48):
Oftentimes it either doesn'tapply to the situation or it's
just not true because chat GPTdoesn't have the access that you
know lawyers do and to thatpoint you are a defense attorney
for psychologists when theirlicense are at risk, and this is
what you're doing day in andday out.
What are the common scenariosthat you're seeing?
(07:09):
Where professionals eitherdidn't seek legal help or they
didn't have the right kind forthem.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Well, typically when somebody gets a licensing board
complaint made against them,they get a letter from the
licensing board that says youknow, you've had a complaint
made against you and we need youto respond to this complaint in
writing and explain to us whatyou did and why and so forth and
so on, in the next how manydays and there's a deadline.
And there are a lot of peoplewho look at that almost as
(07:42):
something that they couldprobably handle themselves.
They're just asking for aresponse and especially if they
don't think they did anythingwrong and they think they could
explain it, that they think,well, I'll just do that.
And sometimes they're kind ofunderstandably upset that
somebody would have complainedabout something they did when
(08:03):
they were just trying to dotheir best good job that they
could, and so they kind of wantto, you know, get going on
getting an explanation andwriting and getting it sent back
.
And sometimes they even makethe mistake of thinking that the
licensing board is some kind oflike professional association,
like the APA, or something thatis sort of more existing, you
know, for the promotion of theprofession and the members and
(08:26):
so forth and so on, when thelicensing board is really really
more analogous to a lawenforcement agency.
I mean, they're really not.
They're looking out for you, thelicensee, they're looking out
for the public that theprofessionals who are going
around with the license whateverit is, in this case licensed
(08:53):
psychology license arepracticing within the confines
of the regulations in that statethat govern the practice of
psychology.
So they're not looking out forthe licensee, they're looking
for reasons to sanction thelicensee, to punish the licensee
or to take the license, even ifit's severe enough.
And so it's really not a goodidea, in my opinion, for really
anyone to be doing thoseresponses to those letters
(09:16):
themselves that they really needto, as soon as they become
aware that there's a complaint,to contact their insurance
company, if they've got one, andthey can read their policy and
see exactly what therequirements are as far as you
know if they need to contactthem and how many days they have
and so forth and so on.
But then get an attorney onboard who is well-versed in both
(09:41):
the law and the subject matterof their profession and have
that person then handle thedealings from then on with the
licensing board about thatmatter.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Yeah, no, I think you are spot on.
When you first receive thatletter it may not seem, it can
be intimidating, but it may notseem as serious as you know
getting a notice that you've gota hearing scheduled or that
you're summoned to court at thisdate, but it is just as serious
.
You know it's still with yourboard.
(10:17):
Your board is governing yourlicense.
They're asking you questionsabout your records, things like
that Seen many a times, wheresomeone thinks that it's not a
big deal, just like you said.
It's almost like they'reperceived as a trade association
and I'm just sending in myrecords so that they know that
things are fine.
But the board's going to combthrough those records and
(10:37):
they're going to look forviolations.
They're going to look forthings that are wrong within
that and you want to haveprotection.
You want to know did you evenhave to send that?
And an attorney who isspecialized in administrative
law who can protect your license?
(10:58):
They know that board, they knowthe proceedings, they know what
you are and aren't supposed tosend or say it's so important to
find someone who understandsall of that.
And you can do that by simplyjust asking them.
When you're consulting with anattorney, do you have experience
with this board?
Have you defended these typesof licenses before?
Those are really crucialquestions that you can ask to
(11:24):
just find out.
Is this the right attorney forme?
Is this the right attorney forme?
Is this the right attorney toprotect my license?
A very small you know, minorthing can turn huge.
I have personally seen here atthe firm we've had a you know
someone come in after they hiredan attorney that was not
specialized in defendingprofessional licenses and they
(11:49):
had a separate case that thatattorney was handling.
So it probably seemed easierthat they just you know, hey,
can you handle this one too?
They were given poor advice.
They were told that the outcomeof one case wouldn't affect
their professional license andwhen they went to go and renew,
lo and behold, they were deniedand they had to come to us.
(12:10):
We kind of had to unravelthings.
But if they had not receivedpoor advice in the first place,
they may have been able to getahead of that or just known the
odds of being able to be grantedthat license and continue
working in that field on aseparate, on the other side of
that coin, as an attorney andI'm not an attorney, but as an
(12:33):
attorney, when you take on acase that you know that you
don't have the legal knowledgeor you know just understanding
of that type of law, you areopening yourself up to a
complaint, you're openingyourself up to be reported to
the board, and I mean it can getreally complicated.
(12:56):
It's just not a situation whereyou as a license holder or you
as an attorney, practicingattorney want to find yourself
in.
So it is crucial that you findsomeone who does specialize and
they know what to expect andwhat they need to defend against
.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
That's right.
That's right.
You know, when you get intothese licensing board cases
there are multiple peopleinvolved.
Typically there's aninvestigator involved who is
sort of the one who's chargedwith collecting the information
and sort of aggregating it andsummarizing it and getting that
(13:35):
over to the board.
And then there are boardmembers who are members of the
profession also, who havevolunteered, typically to serve
on the licensing board, and thenthere are administrative people
who work in the board's office,who typically are involved in
sort of sending things out andreceiving things and
(13:56):
communicating back and forth.
And then there are lawyers atsome point involved on both
sides, the state's side as well.
There are lawyers who work inthe state government who
basically have the boards of thevarious professions as sort of
their clients, and when it getsdown to the business of actually
doing an administrative processor making a settlement
(14:20):
agreement or something, they getinvolved.
And so you have all thesepeople involved who have varying
degrees of knowledge of the lawand the profession.
So you've got some people likethe board members, who know the
profession really well they'remembers of it, but they don't
necessarily know all of the lawas well as you would like and
then you have the investigator,who maybe is a former law
(14:41):
enforcement or something, andnow they're doing investigations
for the professional licensingboards of the state and they
know a lot about how toinvestigate things, but they
don't necessarily know reallythat much about the profession,
and so they have to be educateda little bit about whether
something that looks to themlike well, that sounds a little
weird, was really really weirdfor that profession or it wasn't
(15:02):
.
And then you've got the lawyersinvolved on the state side who
you know they may know a lotabout the law but again, not as
much about the profession, andso it really is important that
the counsel that you have knowsthe both.
They know the law and they knowthe profession.
And if you have a person likethat at that very first juncture
(15:24):
where you get the letter andletting you know as a licensee
that you've got a complaint, ifyou handle that right, you might
be able to end it at that withthe response basically allaying
all concerns anybody would havethat maybe you did anything
wrong and basically providingall of the information that
(15:45):
anybody could want to know aboutthat situation, to the point
where people are satisfied thatokay, there's nothing here and
we're just going to drop it atthis point, and that's certainly
the goal.
But you also could go the otherway with it, where, if you
don't handle it right, you couldnot only increase the concern
about whatever the complaint wasabout, but you could introduce
(16:08):
new things, like you said youcould.
You could reveal moreinformation than you should in
the complaint response that youwould send in if you did it
without the right kind of help.
And also there are even sort ofnuances with that where you can
show in the manner in which yourespond that you're somebody
(16:28):
who is cognizant and caring alot about the regulations.
For example, if somebody makesa complaint in which they
reference somebody else who wasinvolved, maybe in the therapy,
but is not complaining so maybeit's a kid, maybe it's a spouse
or something and there wascouples therapy at one point For
(16:51):
you to be very careful aboutrevealing confidential things
about those third parties in theresponse, confidential things
about those third parties in theresponse.
The third parties who aren'tcomplaining against you haven't
made any complaints about thequality of care that they got,
and so you know to not be justjust, just just liberally
(17:11):
handing out a bunch ofinformation about people who
haven't asked to be involved inthis sort of shows, that you are
somebody who's cognizant ofwanting to protect the rights of
everybody and wanting to beinvolved in this sort of shows,
that you are somebody who'scognizant of wanting to protect
the rights of everybody andwanting to be careful and
cautious, and so forth, and justthat in itself says something.
If you say you know, I'm goingto use initials when I'm talking
about this other person, eventhough the complainant, you know
(17:33):
, referenced this other person,I'm going to be careful about
revealing things about them,because they haven't asked to be
involved in this and I want tobe cognizant of their ongoing
you know, privacy rights.
And then maybe the board comesback and says, well, we have a
right to have that too, and wewant you to give it over.
Okay, but but.
But maybe they do.
(17:53):
But at least you've shown thatyou're trying to be cognizant of
everything and that says somegood things about you that are
sort of separate and apart fromwhatever the subject matter of
the complaint might be.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
Yeah, that's a great point.
This is oftentimes the board'sfirst impression of you and so,
responding with that, like yousaid, the cognizance of your
profession and those rules thatgovern your license is crucial,
you know and having that supportbefore you get even receive a
(18:29):
complaint is essential.
It's just essential protectionfor your license and your
livelihood.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
So let's talk about solutions.
What does it look like when ahealthcare professional has the
right legal team?
Speaker 2 (18:56):
Well, so one of the things that I've noticed in the
recent months here in 2025, thatis sort of a new, a new trend,
and it may not be a nationaltrend.
I'm licensed in several states,not just Texas, and so maybe
this trend that I'm going tomention is one that I have not
actually seen in Texas yet,thankfully, but other places.
(19:20):
There seems to be a tendencysometimes for people on the
board to sort of get a littlebit of a fuzzy line between what
is law enforcement, what isreally looking to see if the
conduct of the licensee wentbelow sort of the minimum floor
(19:44):
standard that is set by theregulations of the profession,
and they kind of drift a littlebit into almost like what
psychology graduate studentswould get in group supervision,
with the faculty sitting therebasically sort of critiquing and
questioning and second guessingthe way in which you know the
(20:07):
psychologist went about handlinga particular case, the
techniques that they used and soforth and so on.
And it's really important thatthe lawyer be well-versed enough
in the profession to noticethat that wait a minute, you're
coming down on this personbecause they didn't do things
exactly the way that you wouldhave done them, but you're not
(20:31):
pointing to specific behaviorsthat violated specific
regulations and so you reallyought to not be trying to
discipline this person for that.
You can make comments if youwant to and say hey, you know, I
think I would have handled thissome different way, but you're
really not.
This is not grad school andwe're not backing group
(20:51):
supervision here.
This is law enforcement thatwe're doing here, and you have
to be able to point to aspecific regulation and say this
specific regulation we thinkwas violated by this specific
act or omission of yours, sothat then we all can look and
see did that happen?
Was it a violation?
And if it isn't that, if it'sreally just somebody thinking,
(21:17):
well, I don't really like theway the person did this.
I think they should have doneit differently.
So I'm going to try to give themsome kind of remedial remedial
things to do, make them go tosome additional continuing
education.
I'm going to try to basicallydo some some discipline here.
The attorney needs to be ableto step in there and go to wait
a minute.
Wait a minute.
(21:38):
This, this is just aprofessional difference of
opinion.
Actually is all we're havinghere, and that might be a
situation in which you mighthave to bring in an expert on
behalf of the licensee to beable to say look, this is not
maybe the most common way tohave handled that situation, but
(22:00):
it is not a there's noconsensus.
Speaker 1 (22:03):
It's not against the law.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
It's not against the law and, beyond that, even
there's no consensus in theprofession that that's a bad way
to handle it.
You can find faculty members atthe university.
You can find books at theuniversity.
You can find books.
You can find experts online whowould say that that's a
perfectly legitimate way tohandle that problem under
certain circumstances and thesewere the circumstances and so
(22:30):
it's not even the case that thiswas an ill-advised way to
handle that under thesecircumstances with this client,
in this case, that the therapistwas dealing with this patient,
and so it's something that ifyou have an attorney who maybe
knows the administrative lawprocess but doesn't really know
all that much about theprofession, might not
(22:52):
necessarily pick up on that asquickly as somebody who does
have both.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Yeah, no, totally.
It's really not just aboutunderstanding the law too.
It's about understanding, likeyou said, the profession, the
high stakes, the emotional surgeof everything that's going on
in the regulatory setting.
It's a lot.
It's a lot going on at one timeand, like we mentioned earlier,
as a professional time, and youknow, like we mentioned earlier
, as a professional, you're heldto a higher standard.
(23:20):
There are rules that govern youand you know you've got to
understand them and make surethat you can avoid these things
or find someone who cantranslate that for you, so that
you know that you're incompliance already and you're
not at risk for a complaint oropening up any doors in which
you could have, you know, acomplaint come in.
(23:42):
So what advice would you havefor health care professionals
who are listening in today, whoeither may be facing a complaint
or they want to stay proactiveand avoid receiving a complaint?
Yeah, well, I think, as amember of a licensed profession.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
For better or for worse, you have to have in your
mind all the time the fact thatthere's a licensing board out
there who oversees yourprofession and could at any time
find themselves asked to lookat what you've done and see if
they feel comfortable with it.
(24:22):
And so I think having that inthe back of your mind all the
time is a good idea when you'redoing your practice, when you're
doing your paperwork, you'redoing your notes, to really be
cognizant of the regulations inyour jurisdiction and really
think about what if this notethat I'm writing on this client,
(24:43):
even though I'm in a hurry andit's Friday afternoon and I'd
like to get on about my weekend?
But what if the licensing boardlooked at this?
Would it have all the elementsit's supposed to have?
Would they clearly be able tosee when it was and who it was
and how long it was and what thediagnosis was and what we did?
And would somebody who wascoming behind me looking at that
(25:04):
without me there be able toknow all of the things that
they're supposed to be able toknow from my documentation?
So there's that Then.
I think not scrimping oninsurance is important.
There are some people who thinkyou know I don't really know
anybody who's had a licensingboard complaint recently and I
(25:24):
haven't had one in my career,and so you know I'm renewing my
insurance here and it's givingme different options of
different amounts that I couldbuy in terms of legal fee
reimbursement if I get alicensing board complaint, and
maybe it starts at $25,000 andit goes to $50,000 and something
above that maybe, and I thinkI'm going to go with the lowest
(25:45):
because I just think that that'splenty and I just don't think
I'm going to need it anyway.
The difference sometimes inthose premiums is really very
low.
It's a tiny amount.
And so I would encourage peopleto really think about that and
maybe think about erring on theside of having more than less
licensing board defense coverageand they can talk with their
(26:06):
insurer about that and they cantalk with their colleagues if
they want to and see.
But I think not scrimping on itor certainly not going without
it, is a smart idea.
And then once they do havereason to believe that there
might be a complaint, reallylooking at that insurance policy
and seeing what their dutiesare, to let the insurance
(26:27):
company know about that, to makesure that they don't give the
insurance company a reason tonot give the coverage because,
well, you didn't let us know inthe time that you were supposed
to, so now we don't have tocover that.
You don't want that situation.
And some of the really reputableinsurance companies they
actually have lawyers on staffwho will help an insured to
(26:50):
figure out, ok, how serious isthis?
And sometimes those folks knowattorneys in the jurisdiction
who have done well for theirinsureds in the past and and
they can make recommendations,and sometimes, sometimes the
insurance policies require that.
But but a lot of them at leastat least offer to give you, give
(27:11):
you, if it requires it or not,that they are willing to give
you recommendations of folks,and that can be good.
And then to to get somebody onthe phone with you ASAP.
An attorney that is is highlyrecommended as being somebody
that knows both your professionand the law, because I've had
people who get those lettersfrom the board saying you've got
(27:33):
a complaint against you and weneed a response in 30 days and
they just sort of put their headin the sand.
They're scared, understandably.
It's their profession, it'stheir livelihood on the line of
put their head in the sand.
They're scared, understandably,it's their profession, it's
their livelihood on the line andinstead of doing the thing that
you would think, which would beto jump on it immediately, they
just sort of go into denialmode about it and then they
finally get on the phone with mewhen there are, you know, seven
days left before the deadlineand there's just not any way
(27:57):
that I can do in a week,typically because I've got other
cases and other things going on, the kind of a response that I
would be proud of.
And so I have to say to thosepeople look, I would love to
represent you, but I can't agreeto that right now until we see
if we could get an extension,and whether I represent you or
not is going to have to becontingent on that.
(28:19):
We're going to need another 30days or 60 days or whatever, I
think, depending on how complexthe case is.
And I think, gosh, you know, ifyou just would, especially if
it's a simple one, relativelysimple one, I think, gosh, if
you just would have contacted methe day you got that letter or
the very next day, we probablycould have gotten the response
in on the original deadline orbefore, and then you would be
(28:42):
out of this, you know, a monthor months sooner on the other
end of the process, which candrag on for a while, because the
boards get backed up and soforth, and especially if it's
not that serious, sometimes itgets sort of backburnered
because they have more seriousones.
And so getting on things early,getting on things sooner rather
than later, would be sort of mylast piece of advice.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
Yeah, no, really great points you made there.
Absolutely explore what yourprofessional liability insurance
because you should have it, youshould be getting it.
Explore your.
You know exactly what yourpolicy covers, Exactly what your
policy covers.
And I love that you mentionedthose in-house attorneys,
(29:26):
because a lot of the insurancecompanies do have those in-house
attorneys who can at leastassist you in the beginning.
It's a great place to startwhen you're looking for tools.
And then, yes, it is so crucialto find an attorney before any
of this happens.
If you can find an attorney whocan do compliance, consulting,
you know legal auditing hey,does everything look good?
(29:48):
Am I at risk for a complaint?
Is the way that I'm doing myclient contracts in compliance
with the board?
That prevention is so much moreaffordable and so much less
traumatic than the defense itreally just is, and you can save
(30:09):
yourself so much heartache andso much stress and anxiety by,
like you said, as soon as youget that letter, doing your due
diligence.
Look at your professionalliability insurance and contact
an attorney who specializes inthis type of law.
And you can find that out byasking two simple questions have
(30:32):
you handled a case like thisbefore and do you practice this
type of law, Do you defend thesetypes of professionals?
This type of law Do you defendthese types of professionals?
So absolutely great advice.
Thank you so much, Dr Russell,for joining us again and
bringing your knowledge andexpertise to our episodes.
(30:52):
It's been a great conversation,I think, with lovely takeaways
for those psychologists toreally go out in the field and
know that they've got supportshould they need it.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
Thank you very much for having me.
I think this was an importantdiscussion.
I hope that it helps somepeople.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Me too.
Me too, and to our viewers.
Whether you are just enteringthe profession or you've been in
practice for years, don'tunderestimate the power of
specialized legal support.
Your license is your livelihood.
Protect it with people whounderstand exactly what's at
stake.
Check out the links below inour description for more
information on Dr Russell andhis practice, for more insights
(31:28):
and resources on how tosafeguard your license.
Make sure to like, follow andsubscribe to Know your Regulator
.
Until next time, stay inspiredand continue engaging with your
regulatory agency.
Know your Regulator the podcastthat inspires you to engage.
This podcast is for educational purposes only, does
not constitute legal advice anddoes not create an
attorney-client relationship.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
If you need legal assistance about a legal problem
contact an attorney.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Welcome back to Know your Regulator the podcast that
inspires you to engage.
I am your host, simone Murphy,and today we're diving into a
topic that affects everyhealthcare professional, whether
you are newly licensed oryou've been practicing for
decades.
We're talking about the valueof having the right legal
support, specifically, howcrucial it is to find attorneys
(00:33):
who understand the regulatoryworld that healthcare
professionals live in.
Joining me is someone whoembodies that dual expertise Dr
Brian Russell, a licensedpsychologist and a practicing
attorney with a deepunderstanding of the pressures
and the pitfalls that licenseholders face.
Brian, thank you for being heretoday.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Thank you for having me.
It's a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
So let's start with setting the scene for our
viewers.
Can you talk about what makesholding a professional license
different from working in othertypes of careers?
Speaker 2 (01:04):
makes holding a professional license, different
from working in other types ofcareers.
Yeah, being a member of aregulated profession has its
pros and its cons.
I mean, when you have to get alicense to do what you do, it
does create barriers to entryfor other people, to not just
anyone can then come into thefield.
However, it does add a layer ofcomplexity to doing the work.
(01:29):
It adds a layer of oversightthat you have to be conscious of
all the time how what you'redoing might be interpreted by
the regulatory board thatoversees your profession.
Where other professions painters, house painters don't have that
, don't have to worry aboutgetting a license to do it,
(01:51):
unless maybe they just need ageneral business license or
something in the state.
But generally you know thatwould be an example of a
profession where you know theycould do a good job or not so
good of a job, and that's justgoing to affect how many people
want to use them in the futuremaybe and what kind of reviews
they might get on Google.
But there's not going to bethis risk that a bunch of other
(02:14):
painters who have gotten onpainting licensing board are
going to say you know, youdidn't measure up to the
regulations governing thepainting profession in our state
, and so we're going to takeaway your ability to keep
painting, and so it does createa layer of concern that a
licensed professional has tohave really at all times when
(02:36):
they're practicing theirprofessions.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Yeah, no, that's very well said and I think that
sometimes license holders justaren't aware of that.
Like you said, that's kind ofwhat separates them.
They're held to a higherstandard.
Not just everyone can jump intothis profession.
There's some boxes that need tobe checked and some education
that needs to happen before.
Another trend I kind of seegoing on is a lot of tools like
(03:05):
AI models or chat GPT are beingused to understand the rules and
regulations that governlicenses, which that can give
you information.
But is it correct, is itfactual, is it up to date, and
does it even apply to yourparticular situation?
Can you talk about what kind ofmisunderstandings that you may
(03:26):
often see when license holdersare trying to handle these
regulatory issues with justgeneral legal advice or poor
legal advice?
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Yeah, it's interesting because with AI, I
think there are multiple layersof concerns.
One of them is that puttinginformation into an AI platform
often causes the person to haveto think about am I putting in
anything that would beconfidential information that
(03:59):
might then become part of adatabase someplace or might sort
of live in the cloud someplacethat isn't under my control
anymore, and so essentially whatI've done is I have made an
unauthorized disclosure of theprivate information of a patient
or a client and then, even ifthat's taken care of and that's
(04:21):
not the case still it's notinfallible and my understanding
of it and I'm not a tech expertby any means, but my
understanding of it is it'sreally only as good as the data
that it has access to, thedatabase of information that it
has access to, and so it looksfor similar things that are in
(04:42):
the database and things thathave basically been done in the
past and it tries to match thoseup with what's being asked of
it today, and so you know it issusceptible to bringing back a
result that is not reallyapplicable to the current
(05:03):
problem really applicable to thecurrent problem.
So, for example, myunderstanding is that if you
needed to find the length of thehypotenuse of a right triangle
and you asked AI to do that andyou gave the AI the lengths of
the two perpendicular sides.
It would look for the ways inwhich people have solved that
(05:24):
problem in the past and it wouldfind the Pythagorean theorem
and it would put in the lengthsof the two perpendicular sides
as a squared and b squared andthen it would come up with the c
squared, the hypotenuse.
But if it didn't have access tothe Pythagorean theorem, if it
couldn't find that anywhere forsome reason, it wouldn't be able
(05:44):
to derive the Pythagoreantheorem the way that.
Pythagoras did thousands ofyears ago, and then come up with
the solution to the problem,and so who knows what answer it
might give in that case, and soso you still have to look at
anything that it might spit backat you and and really really do
(06:08):
a reasonableness test to that.
Does it really reasonably fitthe situation I'm in?
So you kind of have two layersof of concern there, the
accuracy being being sort of thesecond one, and the first one
being am I going to put anythingin that is confidential?
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Yeah, no, I think it's, and it's just being it's
kind of blowing up right now,being very widely used.
And I wanted to touch on thatbecause so often we see a lot of
you know, potential new clientsor you know just people with
general legal issues who havesaid hey, I've gone on chat GPT
and this is what it gave me, andoftentimes it's not correct.
(06:48):
Oftentimes it either doesn'tapply to the situation or it's
just not true because chat GPTdoesn't have the access that you
know lawyers do and to thatpoint you are a defense attorney
for psychologists when theirlicense are at risk, and this is
what you're doing day in andday out.
What are the common scenariosthat you're seeing?
(07:09):
Where professionals eitherdidn't seek legal help or they
didn't have the right kind forthem.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Well, typically when somebody gets a licensing board
complaint made against them,they get a letter from the
licensing board that says youknow, you've had a complaint
made against you and we need youto respond to this complaint in
writing and explain to us whatyou did and why and so forth and
so on, in the next how manydays and there's a deadline.
And there are a lot of peoplewho look at that almost as
(07:42):
something that they couldprobably handle themselves.
They're just asking for aresponse and especially if they
don't think they did anythingwrong and they think they could
explain it, that they think,well, I'll just do that.
And sometimes they're kind ofunderstandably upset that
somebody would have complainedabout something they did when
(08:03):
they were just trying to dotheir best good job that they
could, and so they kind of wantto, you know, get going on
getting an explanation andwriting and getting it sent back
.
And sometimes they even makethe mistake of thinking that the
licensing board is some kind oflike professional association,
like the APA, or something thatis sort of more existing, you
know, for the promotion of theprofession and the members and
(08:26):
so forth and so on, when thelicensing board is really really
more analogous to a lawenforcement agency.
I mean, they're really not.
They're looking out for you, thelicensee, they're looking out
for the public that theprofessionals who are going
around with the license whateverit is, in this case licensed
(08:53):
psychology license arepracticing within the confines
of the regulations in that statethat govern the practice of
psychology.
So they're not looking out forthe licensee, they're looking
for reasons to sanction thelicensee, to punish the licensee
or to take the license, even ifit's severe enough.
And so it's really not a goodidea, in my opinion, for really
anyone to be doing thoseresponses to those letters
(09:16):
themselves that they really needto, as soon as they become
aware that there's a complaint,to contact their insurance
company, if they've got one, andthey can read their policy and
see exactly what therequirements are as far as you
know if they need to contactthem and how many days they have
and so forth and so on.
But then get an attorney onboard who is well-versed in both
(09:41):
the law and the subject matterof their profession and have
that person then handle thedealings from then on with the
licensing board about thatmatter.
Speaker 1 (09:54):
Yeah, no, I think you are spot on.
When you first receive thatletter it may not seem, it can
be intimidating, but it may notseem as serious as you know
getting a notice that you've gota hearing scheduled or that
you're summoned to court at thisdate, but it is just as serious
.
You know it's still with yourboard.
(10:17):
Your board is governing yourlicense.
They're asking you questionsabout your records, things like
that Seen many a times, wheresomeone thinks that it's not a
big deal, just like you said.
It's almost like they'reperceived as a trade association
and I'm just sending in myrecords so that they know that
things are fine.
But the board's going to combthrough those records and
(10:37):
they're going to look forviolations.
They're going to look forthings that are wrong within
that and you want to haveprotection.
You want to know did you evenhave to send that?
And an attorney who isspecialized in administrative
law who can protect your license?
(10:58):
They know that board, they knowthe proceedings, they know what
you are and aren't supposed tosend or say it's so important to
find someone who understandsall of that.
And you can do that by simplyjust asking them.
When you're consulting with anattorney, do you have experience
with this board?
Have you defended these typesof licenses before?
Those are really crucialquestions that you can ask to
(11:24):
just find out.
Is this the right attorney forme?
Is this the right attorney forme?
Is this the right attorney toprotect my license?
A very small you know, minorthing can turn huge.
I have personally seen here atthe firm we've had a you know
someone come in after they hiredan attorney that was not
specialized in defendingprofessional licenses and they
(11:49):
had a separate case that thatattorney was handling.
So it probably seemed easierthat they just you know, hey,
can you handle this one too?
They were given poor advice.
They were told that the outcomeof one case wouldn't affect
their professional license andwhen they went to go and renew,
lo and behold, they were deniedand they had to come to us.
(12:10):
We kind of had to unravelthings.
But if they had not receivedpoor advice in the first place,
they may have been able to getahead of that or just known the
odds of being able to be grantedthat license and continue
working in that field on aseparate, on the other side of
that coin, as an attorney andI'm not an attorney, but as an
(12:33):
attorney, when you take on acase that you know that you
don't have the legal knowledgeor you know just understanding
of that type of law, you areopening yourself up to a
complaint, you're openingyourself up to be reported to
the board, and I mean it can getreally complicated.
(12:56):
It's just not a situation whereyou as a license holder or you
as an attorney, practicingattorney want to find yourself
in.
So it is crucial that you findsomeone who does specialize and
they know what to expect andwhat they need to defend against
.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
That's right.
That's right.
You know, when you get intothese licensing board cases
there are multiple peopleinvolved.
Typically there's aninvestigator involved who is
sort of the one who's chargedwith collecting the information
and sort of aggregating it andsummarizing it and getting that
(13:35):
over to the board.
And then there are boardmembers who are members of the
profession also, who havevolunteered, typically to serve
on the licensing board, and thenthere are administrative people
who work in the board's office,who typically are involved in
sort of sending things out andreceiving things and
(13:56):
communicating back and forth.
And then there are lawyers atsome point involved on both
sides, the state's side as well.
There are lawyers who work inthe state government who
basically have the boards of thevarious professions as sort of
their clients, and when it getsdown to the business of actually
doing an administrative processor making a settlement
(14:20):
agreement or something, they getinvolved.
And so you have all thesepeople involved who have varying
degrees of knowledge of the lawand the profession.
So you've got some people likethe board members, who know the
profession really well they'remembers of it, but they don't
necessarily know all of the lawas well as you would like and
then you have the investigator,who maybe is a former law
(14:41):
enforcement or something, andnow they're doing investigations
for the professional licensingboards of the state and they
know a lot about how toinvestigate things, but they
don't necessarily know reallythat much about the profession,
and so they have to be educateda little bit about whether
something that looks to themlike well, that sounds a little
weird, was really really weirdfor that profession or it wasn't
(15:02):
.
And then you've got the lawyersinvolved on the state side who
you know they may know a lotabout the law but again, not as
much about the profession, andso it really is important that
the counsel that you have knowsthe both.
They know the law and they knowthe profession.
And if you have a person likethat at that very first juncture
(15:24):
where you get the letter andletting you know as a licensee
that you've got a complaint, ifyou handle that right, you might
be able to end it at that withthe response basically allaying
all concerns anybody would havethat maybe you did anything
wrong and basically providingall of the information that
(15:45):
anybody could want to know aboutthat situation, to the point
where people are satisfied thatokay, there's nothing here and
we're just going to drop it atthis point, and that's certainly
the goal.
But you also could go the otherway with it, where, if you
don't handle it right, you couldnot only increase the concern
about whatever the complaint wasabout, but you could introduce
(16:08):
new things, like you said youcould.
You could reveal moreinformation than you should in
the complaint response that youwould send in if you did it
without the right kind of help.
And also there are even sort ofnuances with that where you can
show in the manner in which yourespond that you're somebody
(16:28):
who is cognizant and caring alot about the regulations.
For example, if somebody makesa complaint in which they
reference somebody else who wasinvolved, maybe in the therapy,
but is not complaining so maybeit's a kid, maybe it's a spouse
or something and there wascouples therapy at one point For
(16:51):
you to be very careful aboutrevealing confidential things
about those third parties in theresponse, confidential things
about those third parties in theresponse.
The third parties who aren'tcomplaining against you haven't
made any complaints about thequality of care that they got,
and so you know to not be justjust, just just liberally
(17:11):
handing out a bunch ofinformation about people who
haven't asked to be involved inthis sort of shows, that you are
somebody who's cognizant ofwanting to protect the rights of
everybody and wanting to beinvolved in this sort of shows,
that you are somebody who'scognizant of wanting to protect
the rights of everybody andwanting to be careful and
cautious, and so forth, and justthat in itself says something.
If you say you know, I'm goingto use initials when I'm talking
about this other person, eventhough the complainant, you know
(17:33):
, referenced this other person,I'm going to be careful about
revealing things about them,because they haven't asked to be
involved in this and I want tobe cognizant of their ongoing
you know, privacy rights.
And then maybe the board comesback and says, well, we have a
right to have that too, and wewant you to give it over.
Okay, but but.
But maybe they do.
(17:53):
But at least you've shown thatyou're trying to be cognizant of
everything and that says somegood things about you that are
sort of separate and apart fromwhatever the subject matter of
the complaint might be.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
Yeah, that's a great point.
This is oftentimes the board'sfirst impression of you and so,
responding with that, like yousaid, the cognizance of your
profession and those rules thatgovern your license is crucial,
you know and having that supportbefore you get even receive a
(18:29):
complaint is essential.
It's just essential protectionfor your license and your
livelihood.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
So let's talk about solutions.
What does it look like when ahealthcare professional has the
right legal team?
Speaker 2 (18:56):
Well, so one of the things that I've noticed in the
recent months here in 2025, thatis sort of a new, a new trend,
and it may not be a nationaltrend.
I'm licensed in several states,not just Texas, and so maybe
this trend that I'm going tomention is one that I have not
actually seen in Texas yet,thankfully, but other places.
(19:20):
There seems to be a tendencysometimes for people on the
board to sort of get a littlebit of a fuzzy line between what
is law enforcement, what isreally looking to see if the
conduct of the licensee wentbelow sort of the minimum floor
(19:44):
standard that is set by theregulations of the profession,
and they kind of drift a littlebit into almost like what
psychology graduate studentswould get in group supervision,
with the faculty sitting therebasically sort of critiquing and
questioning and second guessingthe way in which you know the
(20:07):
psychologist went about handlinga particular case, the
techniques that they used and soforth and so on.
And it's really important thatthe lawyer be well-versed enough
in the profession to noticethat that wait a minute, you're
coming down on this personbecause they didn't do things
exactly the way that you wouldhave done them, but you're not
(20:31):
pointing to specific behaviorsthat violated specific
regulations and so you reallyought to not be trying to
discipline this person for that.
You can make comments if youwant to and say hey, you know, I
think I would have handled thissome different way, but you're
really not.
This is not grad school andwe're not backing group
(20:51):
supervision here.
This is law enforcement thatwe're doing here, and you have
to be able to point to aspecific regulation and say this
specific regulation we thinkwas violated by this specific
act or omission of yours, sothat then we all can look and
see did that happen?
Was it a violation?
And if it isn't that, if it'sreally just somebody thinking,
(21:17):
well, I don't really like theway the person did this.
I think they should have doneit differently.
So I'm going to try to give themsome kind of remedial remedial
things to do, make them go tosome additional continuing
education.
I'm going to try to basicallydo some some discipline here.
The attorney needs to be ableto step in there and go to wait
a minute.
Wait a minute.
(21:38):
This, this is just aprofessional difference of
opinion.
Actually is all we're havinghere, and that might be a
situation in which you mighthave to bring in an expert on
behalf of the licensee to beable to say look, this is not
maybe the most common way tohave handled that situation, but
(22:00):
it is not a there's noconsensus.
Speaker 1 (22:03):
It's not against the law.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
It's not against the law and, beyond that, even
there's no consensus in theprofession that that's a bad way
to handle it.
You can find faculty members atthe university.
You can find books at theuniversity.
You can find books.
You can find experts online whowould say that that's a
perfectly legitimate way tohandle that problem under
certain circumstances and thesewere the circumstances and so
(22:30):
it's not even the case that thiswas an ill-advised way to
handle that under thesecircumstances with this client,
in this case, that the therapistwas dealing with this patient,
and so it's something that ifyou have an attorney who maybe
knows the administrative lawprocess but doesn't really know
all that much about theprofession, might not
(22:52):
necessarily pick up on that asquickly as somebody who does
have both.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
Yeah, no, totally.
It's really not just aboutunderstanding the law too.
It's about understanding, likeyou said, the profession, the
high stakes, the emotional surgeof everything that's going on
in the regulatory setting.
It's a lot.
It's a lot going on at one timeand, like we mentioned earlier,
as a professional time, and youknow, like we mentioned earlier
, as a professional, you're heldto a higher standard.
(23:20):
There are rules that govern youand you know you've got to
understand them and make surethat you can avoid these things
or find someone who cantranslate that for you, so that
you know that you're incompliance already and you're
not at risk for a complaint oropening up any doors in which
you could have, you know, acomplaint come in.
(23:42):
So what advice would you havefor health care professionals
who are listening in today, whoeither may be facing a complaint
or they want to stay proactiveand avoid receiving a complaint?
Yeah, well, I think, as amember of a licensed profession.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
For better or for worse, you have to have in your
mind all the time the fact thatthere's a licensing board out
there who oversees yourprofession and could at any time
find themselves asked to lookat what you've done and see if
they feel comfortable with it.
(24:22):
And so I think having that inthe back of your mind all the
time is a good idea when you'redoing your practice, when you're
doing your paperwork, you'redoing your notes, to really be
cognizant of the regulations inyour jurisdiction and really
think about what if this notethat I'm writing on this client,
(24:43):
even though I'm in a hurry andit's Friday afternoon and I'd
like to get on about my weekend?
But what if the licensing boardlooked at this?
Would it have all the elementsit's supposed to have?
Would they clearly be able tosee when it was and who it was
and how long it was and what thediagnosis was and what we did?
And would somebody who wascoming behind me looking at that
(25:04):
without me there be able toknow all of the things that
they're supposed to be able toknow from my documentation?
So there's that Then.
I think not scrimping oninsurance is important.
There are some people who thinkyou know I don't really know
anybody who's had a licensingboard complaint recently and I
(25:24):
haven't had one in my career,and so you know I'm renewing my
insurance here and it's givingme different options of
different amounts that I couldbuy in terms of legal fee
reimbursement if I get alicensing board complaint, and
maybe it starts at $25,000 andit goes to $50,000 and something
above that maybe, and I thinkI'm going to go with the lowest
(25:45):
because I just think that that'splenty and I just don't think
I'm going to need it anyway.
The difference sometimes inthose premiums is really very
low.
It's a tiny amount.
And so I would encourage peopleto really think about that and
maybe think about erring on theside of having more than less
licensing board defense coverageand they can talk with their
(26:06):
insurer about that and they cantalk with their colleagues if
they want to and see.
But I think not scrimping on itor certainly not going without
it, is a smart idea.
And then once they do havereason to believe that there
might be a complaint, reallylooking at that insurance policy
and seeing what their dutiesare, to let the insurance
(26:27):
company know about that, to makesure that they don't give the
insurance company a reason tonot give the coverage because,
well, you didn't let us know inthe time that you were supposed
to, so now we don't have tocover that.
You don't want that situation.
And some of the really reputableinsurance companies they
actually have lawyers on staffwho will help an insured to
(26:50):
figure out, ok, how serious isthis?
And sometimes those folks knowattorneys in the jurisdiction
who have done well for theirinsureds in the past and and
they can make recommendations,and sometimes, sometimes the
insurance policies require that.
But but a lot of them at leastat least offer to give you, give
(27:11):
you, if it requires it or not,that they are willing to give
you recommendations of folks,and that can be good.
And then to to get somebody onthe phone with you ASAP.
An attorney that is is highlyrecommended as being somebody
that knows both your professionand the law, because I've had
people who get those lettersfrom the board saying you've got
(27:33):
a complaint against you and weneed a response in 30 days and
they just sort of put their headin the sand.
They're scared, understandably.
It's their profession, it'stheir livelihood on the line of
put their head in the sand.
They're scared, understandably,it's their profession, it's
their livelihood on the line andinstead of doing the thing that
you would think, which would beto jump on it immediately, they
just sort of go into denialmode about it and then they
finally get on the phone with mewhen there are, you know, seven
days left before the deadlineand there's just not any way
(27:57):
that I can do in a week,typically because I've got other
cases and other things going on, the kind of a response that I
would be proud of.
And so I have to say to thosepeople look, I would love to
represent you, but I can't agreeto that right now until we see
if we could get an extension,and whether I represent you or
not is going to have to becontingent on that.
(28:19):
We're going to need another 30days or 60 days or whatever, I
think, depending on how complexthe case is.
And I think, gosh, you know, ifyou just would, especially if
it's a simple one, relativelysimple one, I think, gosh, if
you just would have contacted methe day you got that letter or
the very next day, we probablycould have gotten the response
in on the original deadline orbefore, and then you would be
(28:42):
out of this, you know, a monthor months sooner on the other
end of the process, which candrag on for a while, because the
boards get backed up and soforth, and especially if it's
not that serious, sometimes itgets sort of backburnered
because they have more seriousones.
And so getting on things early,getting on things sooner rather
than later, would be sort of mylast piece of advice.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
Yeah, no, really great points you made there.
Absolutely explore what yourprofessional liability insurance
because you should have it, youshould be getting it.
Explore your.
You know exactly what yourpolicy covers, Exactly what your
policy covers.
And I love that you mentionedthose in-house attorneys,
(29:26):
because a lot of the insurancecompanies do have those in-house
attorneys who can at leastassist you in the beginning.
It's a great place to startwhen you're looking for tools.
And then, yes, it is so crucialto find an attorney before any
of this happens.
If you can find an attorney whocan do compliance, consulting,
you know legal auditing hey,does everything look good?
(29:48):
Am I at risk for a complaint?
Is the way that I'm doing myclient contracts in compliance
with the board?
That prevention is so much moreaffordable and so much less
traumatic than the defense itreally just is, and you can save
(30:09):
yourself so much heartache andso much stress and anxiety by,
like you said, as soon as youget that letter, doing your due
diligence.
Look at your professionalliability insurance and contact
an attorney who specializes inthis type of law.
And you can find that out byasking two simple questions have
(30:32):
you handled a case like thisbefore and do you practice this
type of law, Do you defend thesetypes of professionals?
This type of law Do you defendthese types of professionals?
So absolutely great advice.
Thank you so much, Dr Russell,for joining us again and
bringing your knowledge andexpertise to our episodes.
(30:52):
It's been a great conversation,I think, with lovely takeaways
for those psychologists toreally go out in the field and
know that they've got supportshould they need it.
Speaker 2 (31:03):
Thank you very much for having me.
I think this was an importantdiscussion.
I hope that it helps somepeople.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Me too.
Me too, and to our viewers.
Whether you are just enteringthe profession or you've been in
practice for years, don'tunderestimate the power of
specialized legal support.
Your license is your livelihood.
Protect it with people whounderstand exactly what's at
stake.
Check out the links below inour description for more
information on Dr Russell andhis practice, for more insights
(31:28):
and resources on how tosafeguard your license.
Make sure to like, follow andsubscribe to Know your Regulator
.
Until next time, stay inspiredand continue engaging with your
regulatory agency.
Know your Regulator the podcastthat inspires you to engage.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com