What I know from my own experience is that when the board investigator interviewed me after I filed a complaint, he had me sign the release form for my therapist so the board would be able to request my records from him.

I have no idea if the therapist has a choice to dig in their heels when the board requests the records and I don't know if they have a choice to submit the summary instead of the full record. In my state, the therapist can choose to give the summary instead of the copies of the records when the patient requests to see the records or they can let the patient examine their file in their office. I have no idea if they have the same choice when dealing with the board. I guess, they may have the right to refuse to present the full record under the pretense that it'd be detrimental for the patient's well-being, but the board would see it as a refusal to cooperate, which would not work in the therapist's favor.

I'd think that the board would be interested in seeing the full records because they want to investigate what factually took place and for that they need as much information as possible.

The board doesn't put everything that pertains to the case, including the patient's records, for public access after the case is closed and the judgment is issued. In fact, they put as little as possible in there just to illustrate the point that the therapist violated ethics in some way. In my case they selected just a few facts from the whole case and from the records to illustrate that point and to make it easy to understand what exactly went wrong. Those were the least personal and sensitive details. It didn't feel violating to me in any sense, especially since my identity was concealed.

So, no, in my experience, the board doesn't make the public record look embarrassing for the patient. They compose it wisely and sensitively. But that was my experience. Other people may experience it differently. What I was trying to say that regardless of what is put out there for public access, people who investigate and evaluate the case would, probably, know a lot of private and sensitive details because that's what the investigation process requires. How else would you be able to accurately assess what went on if you don't dig out as many details as possible? Nothing in that process felt ****ed up to me. They were just doing their job.

I read the public record of my case. There was nothing in there that reflected negatively on me and everything that reflected negatively on my therapist. I've read other people's cases when they went public and haven't seen any case that would look embarrassing for the person who filed a complaint. So, no, there is nothing ****ed up about this process and I hope the simple fact that the investigators would come across many personal details of your case because they need to do their job won't deter anyone from reporting unethical therapists.