Thursday, July 21, 2011

California Board of Psychology revoking Richard Boylan's license

Full And Detailed Transcript of California Board of Psychology revoking Boylan's license to practice in Nov 1996 is included below.


    In the Matter of the Accusation

    Richard J. Boylan, Ph.D    )
    License No. PSY-10047      )              No. W-14
                   )                  N--9404129
         Respondent        )


    The Board of Psychology hereby adopts the attached Proposed
    Decision as its own decision in the above-referenced matter.

    This Decision is effective as of August 4, 1995.

    IT IS SO ORDERED August 4,1995.

                    By: [Signature appears on document]
                        Judith Janaro Fabian, Ph.D.
                        Board of Psychology


                  BEFORE THE
                 BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY
                 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    In the Matter of the Accusation    )
    Against:                           )
    RICHARD J. BOYLAN, Ph.D.           )   No.  W-14 and
    2826 O Street, Suite 2             )        LMS-57
    Sacramento, CA  958116             )
    Psychologist's License             )   OAH Mos. N-9404129
    No. PSY-10047                      )            N-9406179
    MFCC License No. MFC 5943          )
    LCSW License No. 4231              )
               Respondent. )

                  PROPOSED DECISION
          On October 24-28, November 2, 15, 16, 18 and 22,
    December 6, 27 and 30, 1994, and January 11-13, 117, 18 and 31,
    February 1 and 16, and March 1, 1995, in Sacramento, California,
    Muriel Evens, Administrative Law Judge, Office of Administrative
    Hearings, State of California, heard this matter.

          Robert Miller and Arthur Taggart, Deputies Attorney
    General, represented the complainants

          Matheny, Poidmore, Linkert & Sears and Richard S.
    Linkert represented respondent.

          Evidence was received, the record was closed July 20,
    1995, and the matter was submitted.



                  FINDINGS OF FACTS


          Complainants Thomas S. O'Connor, Executive Office of
    the Board of Psychology, and Scott C. Syphax, Interim Executive
    Office of the Board of Behavioral Science Examiners, made and
    files the Accusations in these matters in their official
    capacities and not otherwise.


          On July 16,1987, the Board of Psychology issued
    license number PSY 10047 to respondent Richard J. Boylan.

          On October 30, 1972, the Board of Behavioral Science
    Examiners (BBSE) issued marriage, family and child counselor
    license number MFC 5943 to respondent.

          On March 2, 1974, the BBSE issued licensed clinical
    social worker license number LCS 4231 to respondent.

          At all relevant times, respondent was engaged in the
    private practice of psychology.



          Respondent treated D.W., a female, from approximately
    December 1991 to February 1993. She was referred to respondent
    by a fellow member of the Incest Survivors Anonymous (ISA)
    support group she had been attending. D.W. had been involved
    with ISA for about one year before meeting respondent. She
    continued with ISA, including a subgroup Nothing Too Heavy to
    Share,through the Fall 1992. D.W. was 28 years old and an
    unemployed single mother seeking a therapist who would accept
    Medi-Cal. Respondent agreed to accept her as a Medi-Cal patient.

          D.W. presented as a recovering alcoholic with three
    years of sobriety, and adult child of alcoholic parents, a former
    abuser of cannabis and methamphetamines and an incest victim.
    Respondent's initial diagnosis was:

          Axis I: Post traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD);

              Dissociative Disorder NOS;

              Depressive Disorder NOS;

              Alcohol Dependence, in remission;



              Methamphetamine abuse in remission

              Cannabis Dependence  in remission

    Respondent's plan was to meet weekly or biweekly, as insurance
    permitted, for treatment of depression and traumatic sexual abuse
    and to improve self esteem and personal skills.

          Although initially D.W. was reluctant to try hypnosis,
    respondent encouraged her to do so to retrieve memories of abuse.
    During their fifth session, on January 7, 1992, respondent
    performed D.W.'s first "memory enhancement hypnosis." They
    covered sexual abuse at age four by D.W.'s mother and at age four
    to five by her father. Other sessions involving hypnosis followed
    on occasion, with further recall of childhood sexual abuse and
    possible ritualistic abuse.

          In late winter or early spring of 1992, D.W.
    listened to a radio talk show about abductions by aliens and the
    use of hypnosis. At a therapy session, D.W. asked respondent
    somewhat flippantly if he thought these people may have been
    abused and confused about the memory. Respondent, with a serious
    face, responded that he thought it might be just the opposite.
    In the same session, respondent said that he had some patients
    who may have had extraterrestrial (ET) experiences and he was
    doing some research on the subject.

          At the next session, D.W. brought up the ET issue and
    respondent showed D.W. a book entitled ENCOUNTERS, by Edith
    Fiori. Soon after that, respondent told D.W. that he was going
    on a week-long tour of sites of alleged ET activity. According
    to D.W. (R.T. 10/24/94, 28:8-17):

          "Q  What was your reaction to the doctor's
           discussion with you about this tour of
           extraterrestrial sites?

          "A  I felt really nervous for him. I was
           kind of confused at the time. I was
           starting to believe that maybe he was --
           this was something real. And I was
           nervous for him, and I told him to be

          "Q  Be careful? What did you mean by that?

          "A  Well, specifically, he said he was going
           to some very top secret military places.
           And I was concerned about what might
           happen to him."



    Respondent had spoken to D.W about a secret government cover-up
    and involvement of the U.S. military. Respondent told D.W. the
    sites were connected to government operations involving the
    flying of ET aircraft, recovered ET aircraft and the building of
    aircraft using technology learned from ET sources. From what
    respondent had told her, D.W. feared that on his trip respondent
    might be abducted by ETs.

          In or about a June 1992, session, D.W. brought out
    having daydream-type image or fleeting memory from childhood of
    a strange-looking man, who may have been a molester. Respondent
    asked D.W. to describe what he looked like and his height,
    including his height in relationship to her as a child.
    The image was not clear to D.W., but she recalled he was not tall
    and had sharp features and narrow eyes. Respondent then asked
    D.W. to draw the man, which she did. After that and the
    conversation set forth below, D.W. had the impression that
    respondent thought her image was of an extraterrestrial.

          "Q  Can you describe when that occurred to
           you and why? And why you got that
           impression in your mind that's what you
           were being asked to describe?

          "A  [Respondent] asked me to stand up, and
           he had some sort of tape measure he was
           holding up. And I stood up, and he was
           holding -- well, let's see. And he said
           something like 4 foot or 4-foot
           something. That's about -- well, it
           could be a little taller. That's about

          "Administrative Law Judge: He said or you said?

          "A  He said this. It was kind of under his
           breath.That's when it occurred to me
           that's maybe what he was thinking that
           this might be." (R.T 10/24/94 43:9-

    The session continued with hypnosis. While under hypnosis,
    respondent further inquired whether D.W. could describe in more
    detail the appearance of the man in her image. Then, toward the
    end, she "started getting an image of that like an
    extraterrestrial face and this really bright light, being
    surrounded by a bright light right at the end." (R.T. 10/24/94
    47:11-14.) According to D.W., as she came out of hypnosis:

          "Dr. Boylan was smiling; he was leaning back
          in his chair and smiling. And I remember
          feeling really weird. ... I was really



          confused and scared. And I was kind of angry
          at Dr. Boylan for smiling because I was
          feeling how I was. (R.T. 10/24/94 48:2-8.)

    In June, respondent advised D.W. that he was starting a
    support group (CE-IV)[1] at his home for people who have had
    extraterrestrial experiences. He said that while he thought it
    was probably premature, he thought D.W. should come to the

          Within a week or two of the therapy session, D.W.
    attended the meeting at respondent's home. About ten people
    attended and D.W. recognized one from the ISA group. During this
    meeting respondent played an audio tape by James Harter,
    explaining his views on extraterrestrials, what they are like,
    who is likely to be abducted and so on.

          D.W. continued to attend the CE-IV group meeting about
    every three weeks and continued with her therapy with respondent,
    until early 1993. After a few months of attending CE-IV
    meetings, D.W. brought to therapy a nightmare she had had since
    childhood. The dream involved floating down a hallway to the
    foyer and then seeing a monster. At the CE-IV meetings she had
    heard of similar occurrences among persons who had had ET
    contact. Under hypnosis, her dream continued.

          "Then the monster became like an E.T., and then there
          were other extraterrestrials. And then I was, like,
          walked out of my home where I saw some bright lights
          out on the front lawn." (R.T. 10.24/94 70:9-13.)

          From the time of this hypnosis, D.W. began to identify
    more with the CE-IV group and feel that she might have had an ET
    experience. Notes from her therapy sessions show increased ET
    references, along with continued references to ritualistic abuse.

          During the Fall of 1992, respondent told the CE-IV group
    of a UFO/ET conference in Las Vegas from Saturday, November 29
    through Tuesday, December 2, 1992. Respondent would be
    presenting information from his research and experiences and
    invited others to attend. Because of the expense and other
    reasons, none of the CE-IV group planned to attend. As the
    conference neared, respondent told the group that others
    interested in presenting their experiences could have their way
    paid to the conference. D.W., R.R. and R.W. signed on to go to
    the conference to share their experiences.

    [1] CE-IV refers to close encounters of the fourth kind, or those
    involving abductions by aliens.



          Before going to the conference, respondent had members
    of the support group draw "visual representations." D.W.
    participated, drawing a figure, which was to be from her
    experience. the last therapy session before the conference,
    respondent told D.W. that she would be able to go, expenses paid
    by the conference organizer. Respondent set up a meeting at his
    house one evening about a week before the departure for the four
    area participants to plan their trip. Respondent said that part
    of the meeting would be in the hot tub and that no suits were
    allowed. Respondent did not allow bathing suits in his hot tub
    because he believed residual detergent in the suits left "soap
    scum" in the tub.

          D.W. went to respondent's house and was the first to
    arrive. Respondent and his wife were there, R.R. and R.W. then
    arrived. The others adjourned to the backyard while D.W. hid in
    the bathroom, afraid to be naked in front of the others and
    afraid to see everyone else. She was terrified and embarrassed.
    After the other four were in the hot tub, D.W. wrapped in a
    towel, went out to the tub and jumped in. They discussed plans
    for the trip. Following the meeting, D.W. went back to the house,
    got dressed and left. D.W. did not want to be nude around
    others, she was uncomfortable with her own body and embarrassed.

          The four flew from Sacramento to Las Vegas and rented a
    car. The two women, R.R. and D.W., shared a hotel room. The two
    men, respondent and R.W., shared another room. The group
    attended and/or participated in a number of the sessions. On
    Monday, the four planned a trip to Area 51, a large military area
    in Nevada where ET activity is alleged to take place. R.R.
    became ill and unable to go along. R.W. decided to stay in Las
    Vegas with R.R. At about 4:00 p.m., respondent and D.W. set out
    in a rental car for Area 51. Unfortunately, due to a
    navigational error. the two ended up circumnavigating the area
    and returning about 2:30 in the morning.

          Upon their return to the hotel, D.W. went to her room
    and found both R.R and R.W. asleep, although in separate beds.
    She told respondent. who was in the hall, that the two were in
    the room. She then went to respondent's room. They were both
    tired and respondent was due to speak that morning. D.W.
    undressed and went to one of the beds in the respondent's room;
    he went to the other bed. After the lights were out, D.W. began
    moaning in pain, apparently some form of gastric distress as a
    result of fast food eaten on the Area 51 drive. Respondent
    offered to give her a massage to help relieve the pains. Both
    D.W. and respondent were nude, although respondent was covered by
    the sheet. As D.W. came over to the respondent's bed, she stated she
    did not want any sexual relationship. Respondent advised her
    that he did not want one because he did not want to risk his
    license, his marriage or his therapeutic relationship with D.W.
    He then gave her an abdominal message. Afterward, he turned over



    and went to sleep, expecting D.W. to return to her bed. She did
    not and slept in next to respondent until the alarm went off at
    6:00 a.m.

          At some point in the Fall of 1992, respondent and the
    CE-IV group decided to write a book about their experiences.
    Respondent and his wife were to be the editors and respondent
    would include his research. The group members would provide
    individual chapters on their experiences. D.W. had drafted her
    chapter and rewritten it following her submittal to respondent's
    wife for editing. Respondent returned a corrected version of her
    chapter to her at a therapy session in or about late January
    1993. There was no written agreement between respondent and D.W.
    regarding any royalties or profits from the publication of the
    book. There was no written notice or agreement between
    respondent and D.W. regarding any research he was conducting of
    which she was part.

          In February 1993, D.W. discontinued therapy with
    respondent and ceased her participation in the CE-IV group. She
    did not submit a final version of her book chapter. The book was
    published and her work was not included.

          On February 16, 1993, D.W. respondent's termination
    diagnosis of D.W. was:

          Axis I:  Factitous Disorder with Psychological

          Axis II: Personality Disorder NOS (Addiction to Victim
            Status Syndrome)

            Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder.



          Respondent treated K.G., a female, from approximately
    September 16, 1991 until mid-June 1992. She presented, at age
    32, with a history of childhood physical and sexual abuse,
    alcohol and cannabis abuse, extreme anxiety and asthma. Her
    mother is an alcoholic and Vallium abuser and was sent to Patton
    State Hospital in 1965. Her father raped her sister, who was
    then 12, (K.G. was about four at the time and had flashbacks of
    seeing the rape.) The children were placed in care with abusive
    foster parents. As of September 1991, K.G. was employed and
    "married" to Janna for seven years. K.G. had been in therapy for
    10 years with a female therapist and wanted to try a male
    therapist to address her prejudice against men in personal



          Respondent's initial diagnosis:

          Axis I:  Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
            residual state, severe;

            Alcohol Dependence, residual state;

            Cannabis Dependence;

            Depressive Disorder NOS

          Axis II: Axis II deferred, obsessive-compulsive traits

    Respondent's treatment plan was "intermediate duration biweekly
    psychotherapy to correct PTSD, enhance identity and intimacy

          K.G. had dropped out of graduate school in social work,
    but was working for a social services agency. She is a fifth
    degree black belt in a form of Karate. Her asthma could be
    severe and induced by exercise or stress. Part of her past
    therapy included breathwork with relaxation.

          K.G. continued breathwork with respondent. On one
    occasion, as part of the breathwork, he touched her abdominal
    area. There was no evidence K.G. considered the touch sexual.
    In early December 1991, respondent invited K.G. to a special
    multi-hour session, at his house. Respondent told K.G. to bring
    a towel, which she thought was for breathwork on the floor. When
    she arrived at respondent's home, they went into the living room
    and spoke for a while. He then mentioned the hot tub for water
    therapy to relax and let go of tension. Respondent directed K.G.
    to an area to undress and it became clear that the hot tubbing
    would be in the nude. She was confused, but followed his
    direction and met him in the backyard. Both K.G. and respondent
    were wearing only a towel. Both got into the hot tub, with K.G.
    taking off her towel "at the last second."

          Respondent and K.G. engaged in some small talk,
    According to K.G.:

          "Pretty much I had just had a general increase in
          anxiety and nervousness and vacillating from
          questioning -- started to question, 'is this okay?'
          this has never happened ore been requested by
          anyone I've worked with, and I hadn't really heard of
          it being done. So on the one hand, questioning the
          legitimacy, and on the other hand that scaring me
          because I didn't want this to not be right and me be
          participating, so I would flip back into denial and
          say, 'I'm sure it's okay."... I feel like I just



          started to separate, the way I would separate during
          violent episodes in my childhood, where you just
          started to go away from your body." (R.T. 11/2/94

    Respondent did remark on K.G.'s breathing patterns and gave her
    some instructions on breathing. At one point, when it had become
    too hot for them to remain in the tub, they sat on the rim.

          "...I remember one time taking a deep breath and kind
          of stretching my hand in an upward direction, and him
          saying that that was good to breath from that low, and
          then once he coached me to look at his stomach while he
          breathed to see how his stomach moved when he breathed
          ..." (R.T. 11/2/94 20:14-18.)

    While in the hot tub, respondent "worked" on the upper shoulder
    area, to relieve tension. He was behind respondent, at somewhat
    of a 90-degree angle, so that his head was to K.G.'s side.

          After perhaps "a couple of hours," they got out of the
    hot tub, dried off, wrapped the towels around themselves and
    returned inside. K.G. got dressed and went into the living room.
    Respondent said that he didn't mean for her to get dressed yet, so she
    undressed again. She returned to the living room and found
    respondent , still undressed, sitting on the floor, "Indian
    style." K.G. sat across from respondent, her legs also crossed.
    Respondent asked K.G. to look into his eye, with their hands
    connected--her hands palm up, his palm down. After an
    uncomfortably long period, perhaps three to five minutes without
    any speaking, respondent burned a triangle incense and asked K.G.
    if he could burn it around her. He then outlined her upper body
    with the incense. After that they got up and K.G. got dressed.
    When she returned to the living room, respondent had also
    dressed. They say on some chairs and engaged in some "wrap-up"
    conversation, such as when they would meet again. There was no
    "processing" of what had happened.

          On two occasions during her therapy, respondent asked
    K.G. if she wanted to participate in a group trip to Harbin Hot
    Springs, a nude resort. One purpose of the trip was to allow
    women to improve their body image. Respondent and his wife would
    attend and there would be nude bathing in the hot springs.
    Respondent declined the invitations.

          K.G. was seeing respondent about twice a month. WHile
    they agreed that more frequent sessions would be helpful, K.G.
    did not have sufficient funds to pay for the additional time. In
    or about February or March 1992, respondent suggested a barter
    system where he would provide therapy to K.G., K.G. would provide
    karate lessons or another service to a third person, and the
    third person would provide massage to respondent. K.G. knew a



    massage therapist and contacted her about the possibility.
    However, she was not interested. Respondent then suggested
    Janna, but K.G. did not want to involve her. Ultimately, it was
    agreed that K.G. would do the massage. Since she had no
    experience in massage, she contacted her friend for a "couple of
    hours" of instructions.

          In an effort to comply with ethical standards,
    respondent and K.G. agreed to exchange an hour of massage for an
    hour of psychotherapy. Once that program was implemented, K.G.
    started weekly therapy, providing massage about every other week.
    At some point, respondent advised K.G. that he had been to a
    conference and learned they would have to exchange money for
    their services. After that, they wrote checks to each other.
    Respondent came to K.G.'s home for the massage. which occurred
    in the living room. Respondent preferred nude, uncovered
    massage. After the massage, he would walk nude from the living
    room to shower and then return to the living room to dress.

          K.G. was uncomfortable with the massage and with the
    nudity. She felt she was not assertive enough to say anything
    and was intimidated by respondent.
          "It's easier for me to be assertive with strangers, not
          with people I'm connected to, let alone dependent on.
          If Richard Boylan had physically attacked me, I would
          have physically neutralized him. To deal with him
          emotionally, I have a weakness. A physical assault
          straight arm, I could handle it, I wouldn't let anyone
          harm me, ...but I had a lot of issues with Richard. I
          was dependent on him, I wanted his approval, and I
          didn't want to believe this was betrayal." (R.T.
          11/2/94 36:15-23.)

          During the final session, respondent commented to K.G.
    that if she happened to "graze" his testicles, it would be okay.
    It was warm outside and K.G.was hot and sweating. She was
    wearing jogging shorts and a tank top. Respondent suggested that
    she take her shirt off if she was hot. K.G. did not do so.
    Later, during that same massage session, respondent asked K.G to
    work in the lower abdomen and thigh region. K.G. told respondent
    that she had not been taught to work in that area and had been
    taught it was inappropriate to have such contact with a client.
    Respondent ridiculed K.G., indicating something to the effect
    that it "sounds like a person [referring to K.G.'s trainer] who
    is worried and up-tight." (R/T. 11/2/94 37:26.) Respondent 
    then offered to demonstrate on K.G. how he wanted the massage
    done and suggested it would work better if she disrobed.
    According to K.G.:

          [T]hat was the light switch, two-by-four approach to
          me where I thought I was going to be sick, because at



          that point, my denial had to stop. And I feel that if
          there was a pivotal point in my relationship with Dr.
          Boylan, whether it be in the therapeutic capacity or in
          the body work capacity, that that was the first time I
          thought that in a serious way this might not only not
          be appropriate, but perhaps be sexual." (R.T. 11/2/94

    Respondent demonstrated lightly on her stomach, through her
    shirt, how he wanted to be massaged. He was very conservative.
    However, when it came time for K.G. to work on respondent, she
    felt ill and excused herself from the room. Ultimately she
    finished the massage. She left the room when respondent wrote
    the check for payment, as she did not feel comfortable being in
    the same room with him.

          At the following therapy session, K.G. told respondent
    that she was uncomfortable and did not wish to continue with the
    massage arrangement. Respondent "just said okay" and the session
    proceeded. At the next therapy session, respondent related
    differently to K.G. He seemed to her to be more distant, aloof.
    He did not make eye contact or allow her to speak. He left the
    room twice, something he had not done before, and cut off the
    session 15 - 20 minutes early. K.G. was so angry about the
    session that she stopped on her way home to call respondent from
    a telephone booth. She told him she wanted him to stop inviting
    her to Harbin Hot Springs and that she no longer felt safe with
    him. She felt he was violating boundaries and she did not trust
    him. She told him she was angry  with how he handled the therapy
    session. Respondent then called K.G. after she got home. She
    restated her feelings. He raised his voice and told her she was
    getting "A-1 therapy," and was just running away from therapy.
    K.G. felt respondent was screaming at her. Respondent followed
    up with calls to K.G. to schedule additional sessions, but she
    did not return his calls.

          Respondent added the following diagnosis to K.G.'s

          Axis II Borderline Personality Disorder

              Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder



          Respondent treated D.S. from September 1990 through
    February 1993. She presented, at age 31, with spinal and other
    injuries from a serious vehicle accident three years earlier,
    molest by her teacher at age 13 and rape at 18, which resulted in
    pregnancy. Her parents are alcoholics. She had been diagnosed



    with Chronic Fatigue Immune Deficiency Syndrome (CFIDS), a
    disease which severely limited her ability to work and function.
    D.S. wanted to find some healing related to the issues of her
    molest and the distance she felt from her family, the rape and
    giving up the child for adoption, and the vehicle accident. She
    wanted to reduce stress, to help cope with CFIDS. Respondent's
    initial diagnosis of D.S. was:

          Axis I:   Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD),
             residual state

             Dipthymia, secondary, early onset

             Psychological Factors Affecting Physical
             Condition (Provisional)

          Axis II:  Dependent Personality Disorder

          Axis III: Multiple Musculoskeletal traumata (by
             history);neuromyelitis, infectious venulitis
             and immune deficiency syndrome (by history)
    Respondent's treatment plan called for biweekly sessions "to
    reduce depression, resolve PTSD symptoms, reduce driving phobia,
    improve self=esteem, [and] eliminate over-reliance on somatic
    victimization for sense of identity."
          During the early part of her therapy with respondent,
    the focus was on D.S.'s emotional recovery from her accident and
    her relationship with her family. At session 16, on February
    21, 1991, she told respondent about a recurring dream involving
    small figures which looked like monks at the end of the hall.  In
    the dream, she tried to turn on lights, but none worked. She got
    angry because she could not see them and hit one of the "monks."
    After that, they all disappeared. Then the dream would repeat.
    D.S. had a second dream about a man, dressed in black, whose face
    she could not see. She wrestled with him; he was trying to kill

          Respondent continued to treat D.S. for the issues she
    presented at the beginning of her therapy. Respondent told her
    she did not know boundaries, which is why she "let him (the
    teacher) do it." Respondent said that in his experience, the
    lack of boundaries signaled possible abuse at an early age. He
    told her he thought she had been molested earlier, in addition to
    age 13. He then used hypnosis to help D.S. "by recovering
    repressed memories."

          In the Spring 1992, respondent brought up in therapy
    the subject of ETs and dwarf-like beings. D.S. reminded
    respondent of her earlier dream about the monks. Respondent gave
    D.S. an article from the Atlantic Monthly, August 1991, entitled



    "The UFO Experience."He asked her to read the article and see
    if any of the feelings described were familiar to D.S. The ET
    material frightened D.S., but also made her more curious. While
    she thought of the monks as a dream, respondent told her the
    "dream" was in fact  a "visitation." Respondent identified the
    "monks" as "Jawas," one type or race od aliens.He also showed
    her photos after his return from his "grand tour" of the
    Southwest military bases alleged to be involved in ET activity.
    In some of those photos were drawings of aliens respondent
    identified as "Grays."

          Respondent told D.S. that hypnosis might help her learn
    if she had been abducted by aliens. D.S. was frightened as did
    not want to know of the "dream" was in fact not a dream. No
    hypnosis was performed on the monk dream, but respondent brought
    up the possibility again, suggesting that hypnosis might
    establish what really happened.Respondent told D.S. that ETs
    cloud people's minds, making them believe that what really
    happened was just a dream, a pleasant experience or did not
    happen at all. Respondent said the only way to find out was
    through debriefing through hypnosis. While D.S. declined
    hypnosis, respondent suggested she participate in his CE-IV
    group, to meet with others who had had similar experiences,
    processed them and found positive elements. He described the
    other participants, at R.T. 11/15/94 78:17:

          A  "They were clients and people that came to him.
          Some with ET experiences, some that found out...
          that they had ET experiences after seeing him.
          They were all screened do there wasn't any danger
          that they were infiltrated by the government."

          After rejecting several offers by respondent to attend
    the CE-IV group meetings, D.S. finally agreed, because "he kept
    bringing it up so I went." D.S. went to her first meeting in or
    about September 1992. She arrived late and the discussion
    involved Area 51, the government cover-up and how respondent's
    telephone was probably tapped, now that he was coming out in
    public and speaking about ETs. It was discussed that if his
    phone was tapped, then it was possible that others in the group
    were also being spied on. D.S. followed the suggestion of a
    telephone company employee who participated in  the CE-IV
    meetings.When the phone rang, she would pick it up and drop it.
    She also started using her answering machine to screen calls,
    because she was receiving calls where the caller would not
    respond and just hang up.

          At the next therapy session following the CE-IV
    meeting, respondent asked her what she thought of the meeting and
    they discussed the phone tapping issue and other matters from
    the group. At a later group meeting, respondent and others
    discussed putting together a book to get the message out. The



    format would include personal stories, like an anthology. In a
    following therapy session, D.S. told respondent that she did not
    feel that she had anything to write. She did not feel she had
    anything concrete. Respondent told her "Just write what you
    have. It's enough." Both at the support and in therapy
    sessions, respondent provided draft and revised copies of the
    book's table of contents and his chapter on his experiences.
    D.S.'s story was included in the table of contents. In therapy,
    respondent discussed the benefits and risks involved in
    participating in the book. Among the risks would be placing
    oneself more in the public eye and "silencing by the secret
    government." Respondent indicated he would be at higher risk.
    D.S. believed what respondent said. At R.T. 11/15/94 109:2-8:

          A  "He told me that they have the ability to make a
          person die very quickly looking like it was
          natural causes. They have the ability to use a
          little dart that doesn't leave a trace.They can
          make a person die of cancer within a few weeks.
          That he would probably be the target because he
          was the leader."

          At R.T. 109:14-16:

          Q  "You say you were concerned for him. Did you
          express your concern?

          A  "I asked him to be really careful."

          Also in the Fall 1992, D.S. complained to respondent
    about difficulties eating and sleeping, and ringing in her ears.
    She was concerned. Respondent told her that maybe the ETs were
    doing a tune-up on her.

          D.S had a second dream in early1993 that she
    discussed with  respondent shortly thereafter. In the dream, she
    woke up to a distant roar, got out of bed and walked to the
    living room. There she looked up through the atrium skylight as
    a pink light was coming down. She felt joy and thought she saw
    Ghandi. She then felt very peaceful and slept well after the
    dream.When she woke she felt good about the dream. Respondent
    suggested hypnosis to more fully explore the dream. D.S. agreed,
    because the dream had been positive and she felt safe about
    learning more. Respondent told D.S. that there was a strong
    possibility of ET involvement.

          During hypnosis, respondent took D.S. through the
    dream into the atrium. At R.T. 11/15/94 6:1:

          A  "...I stand under the light in the atrium and then
          go up through into the sky.



          Q  "Was he asking you question through the process?

          A  "Yes.

          Q  "What was he asking you?

          A  "'What did it look like? 'Was it a ship?' 'What
          shape was it?' 'What was it made of?' 'Was it
          metal?' 'What kind of metal?' 'What did they
          look like?' 'Was there more than one?' 'Were you
          standing on a floor?' 'Were there walls?' 'Were
          there lights?' 'Were there sounds?' 'Was the
          floor solid?' 'Was it metal?' 'Was it something
          else?' 'Where was the light coming from?'

          According to D.S., in her original dream there was no
    ship and there were no walls. What had been a comforting dream,
    through hypnosis turned ugly, more like a nightmare. At R.T.
    11/15/94 70:25:

          A  "[T]he dream turned into being put on some kind of
          a table and probed with some kind of probe that
          really hurt bad, and me feeling very angry about,
          'Why are you hurting me?' And that there was
          something wrong with me and 'Why don't you fix
          it?' and then one of the -- after this, like
          escorting me back to my room and I couldn't move,
          and that was it.

    In addition, D.S. recalls from the hypnosis session that "They did
    something. Removed something." None of the above was in the
    original dream. However, in 1991, D.S. had undergone surgery for
    the removal of an ovary. At that time she was angry and scared
    and had a bad reaction to the anesthesia.

          After the hypnosis, respondent told D.S. that the
    aliens sounded like they were "reptilians or amphibs." He asked
    D.S. to draw one of them, but she unable to "put it
    together." Respondent then sketched one for her, but she did not
    think it was correct. She told respondent she was scared. D.S.
    had learned in the CE-IV group that the ETs could return and she
    was afraid "they" could come back anytime and there was nothing
    she could do about it. To D.S., respondent did not seem
    concerned about her fear. He did not explain how the product of
    this hypnosis was going to help D.S. solve any of her presenting

          About half way through her therapy with respondent he
    invited D.S to spend a day at Harbin Hot Springs with him, his wife
    and a few other patients. The trip would be billed as a
    regular therapy session and involve certain exercises and soaking
    in the hot springs in the nude. The purpose of the trip was for



    the patients to improve self-esteem and see their bodies as good.
    Respondent told D.S. the trip would help her heal by becoming
    comfortable with her body and her sexuality. D.S. declined
    respondent's invitation because she was not comfortable being
    nude in front of people she did not know. Respondent repeated
    the invitation a few times, and each time D.S. declined. After a
    break of a few months, respondent indicated that there would be a
    second date scheduled for the trip. He again invited D.S. and
    she accepted the invitation because she wanted to heal, but felt
    stressed and anxious. The night before the trip, D.S. left a
    message for respondent that she could not go.

          D.S. was part Native American and wanted to learn
    more about her heritage and participate in Native American
    activities and rituals. Since about August 1991, D.S. had
    been participating in monthly prayer meetings as part of her
    Cherokee ancestry.  She had discussed these in therapy with
    respondent, how it felt really good and how she felt a real
    connection. Respondent told her that a lot of people who had
    CE-IV experiences had a need for a spiritual belief and many
    identified with the Native American belief because of the concept of
    interrelationship and the living earth. About November 1992
    respondent said at meetings and in therapy with D.S. that there
    was some interest in the CE-IV group in forming a side group
    dealing with the spiritual aspects of CE-IV, with special
    interest in Native American spirituality. Respondent asked if
    D.S. wanted to participate, and she indicated she did.

          In about February 1993, D.S. got a call giving her the
    time and place for the first meeting of the side group. D.S.
    understood the meeting would be to talk about the concept and
    direction, and to find some connection between CE-IV and
    spiritual belief. D.S. met respondent and some others at the
    American River. Respondent brought a backpack with certain
    Native American ceremonial items in it. He brought out what
    appeared to be a Hopi rattle, a pipe, tobacco and cedar. He lit
    some cedar, blew it out and used it to smudge participants for
    cleansing. He said they would load the pipe, pass it around and
    each person would say a prayer, smoke from the pipe and pass it
    on. Respondent asked each person to make a statement about their
    Native American beliefs. D.S. became frightened by the
    experience. She did not feel right. She thought the items were
    being used as a show and that participation was disrespectful.
    When it was her time to speak, she said she had nothing to add.
    Respondent became angry with her for failing to participate.

          A few days later, D.S. went to her scheduled therapy
    session. By that time she no longer trusted respondent and no
    longer considered him a caring person. She ceased her
    relationship with him on the spot.

          Respondent's diagnosis at termination was:



          Axis I:  Factitious Disorder with Psychological
            Symptoms (Psychological Munchausen Syndrome);

          Axis II: Personality Disorder NOS (Addiction to Victim
            Identity Syndrome)

          The evidence did not establish that respondent
    discussed with D.S. intimate details of his sexual relationship
    with his wife.


          Respondent has been involved with counseling for about
    30 years, first as a Catholic priest, and later as a licensed
    therapist. He has no prior disciplines. Respondent was employed
    by community agencies, such as the Marin and Calaveras County
    Mental Health Departments, before opening a private practice. He
    is married and the father of two and the stepfather of two. AT
    the time of the Accusation by the Board of Psychology, respondent
    was president of the Sacramento Valley Psychological Association.

          Respondent was not fueled by evil motive. He believes
    in extraterrestrial life and believes he has had ET experiences.
    In 1989, he had he had three patients who presented with stories of ET
    contact. It was those contacts that inspired his interest in
    researching ET issues. He formed the CE-IV group so that
    experiencers would have others with whom to share, so they would
    not feel isolated.

          While respondent believes that there is nothing
    intrinsically erotic or wrong with nudity, he also had no
    understanding that others, and in particular his patience here,
    might not be as comfortable as he in nudity with others. While
    he may not have had a sexual motivation, these patients
    considered at least some of his actions to raise sexual issues.
    Respondent showed an incredible lack of insight in failing to
    appreciate the distress he caused these patients.

          Respondent has participated in individual therapy since
    these events. Unfortunately, his therapist did not testify.
    While respondent testified that he has learned of possible
    errors, he did not express understanding of his misconduct. When
    he did address the charges, and possible wrongdoing on his part
    was conditional, or placed responsibility on others. For
    example, when asked if he would handle the hot tubbing situation
    differently, rather than saying something like, "I would not do
    it. I would not put my patients at risk," respondent replied:

          "Absolutely... First of all, given the fact that a
          current client was involved, even though I had drawn
          the conclusion that she had resolved the abuse
          traumatic issues to the point where there was minimal



          to no risk of resurfacing or exacerbation of them, upon
          further reflection, it has become obvious that one can
          never have total certainty that a person will not
          interpret or misperceive or be told by someone else that
          they ought to have a perspective about that experience.
          Or in all the other ways in which one can, however
          innocent an even is,derive a sense of harm. So that
          is one consideration that would lead me not to
          reengineer such an event.

          "Another consideration is that it has become abundantly
          clear to me by subsequent statements by knowledgeable
          persons, including the board's experts, that the
          contemporary reading on standards of practice does not
          include therapist nudity in the presence of patients
          regardless of innocence or safety of situation or
          patient's level of recovery or proximity of termination
          of therapy."

          "And I could go on and on if need be, but there are
          compelling considerations that would make it quite
          clear to me that that is not a situation that needs to
          repeat. And in hindsight, should (not) have taken
          place the way it did." (R.T. 1/12 - 1/13/95 213:5 -

          Respondent said he would not repeat the kind of conduct
    that occurred here. However, it was not established that
    respondent has gained any insight, only that he has learned from
    this disciplinary hearing experience that certain conduct is
    unacceptable. Respondent never apologized for what he did.
    Respondent never admitted what he did was wrong.


          Most of the material facts in this matter were not in
    dispute. In some circumstances, the differences represent the
    different perspectives of the persons involved. The complaining
    witnesses, D.W., K.G. and D.S., appeared to testify accurately to
    the best of their recollection. It was clear that D.W. had a
    history of being highly suggestible, adopting as her ideas and
    beliefs those of people around her and authors she had read.
    D.S. still carried a lot of anger toward and distrust of
    respondent. K.G. felt she was worse emotionally after her
    therapy with respondent.

          For the most apart, respondent was credible, although
    putting his own spin on events. However, he was also evasive,
    and at times pompous. He attacked the complaining witnesses'
    credibility and stability (by his final diagnosis,) yet for the
    same time period he had been seeking written reports from two of



    them for his book on ET encounters and had one (D.W.) accompany
    him to speak at a UFO conference shortly before his final

          Respondent argued that he had treated D.W., and
    especially D.S., for some time before the ET issue arose.
    However, it arose at approximately the same time for both
    patients -- March 12, 1992 for D.S. and for D.W., shortly before
    the respondent left for his reconnaissance tour in April 1992. By
    this time, respondent was well into his research on the "secret
    government" and its efforts to disinform the public of UFOs and
    ETs. He had already advertised for research subjects who thought
    they might have had ET experiences. And it was shortly before
    the formation of his CE-IV group. His focus at that time was on
    extraterrestrial issues. At best he inadvertently allowed that
    focus to move into therapy as the primary interpretation of
    dreams and memories.


          The Board of Behavioral Science Examiners established
    costs of $9205. No cost declarations were filed by the board of



          While the patients in this matter each questioned, at
    times, the sexual motivation of respondent, it was not
    established he in fact has such motivation while providing
    therapy or other relationships to these patients. It is not
    necessary for respondent's motivation to be sexual for sexual
    abuse to occur. Great weight must be given to the "victim's"
    perspective. Here, however, the victims were not sure what was
    going on. There was no sexual contact. They were upset and
    confused. The evidence did not establish sexual misconduct in
    violation of Business and Professions Code sections 726, 2960(o),
    4982(k) or 4992.3(k)


          Respondent abused his role as a therapist and was
    grossly negligent, in violation of Business and Professions Code
    section 2960(j), 4982(d) and 4992.3(d) in imposing his personal
    views of D.W. and D.S., as set forth in Finding III and V.




          Respondent committed gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and
    4992.3(d) when he developed an inappropriate dual relationship
    with D.W. that included travel together to and around Las Vegas,
    as established bt Findings III.

          Respondent committed  gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and
    4992.3(d), when he gave D.W. a massage in his hotel room in Las
    Vegas, as established by Findings III.

          Respondent committed gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and
    4992.3(d), when he invited D.W. to his home in November 1992 and
    engaged in nude hot tubbing, as established by Findings III.

          The evidence did not establish that respondent
    suggested that he perform a vaginal examination on D.W.

          Respondent committed gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and
    4992.3(d), when he invited K.G. to his home in December 1991 and
    engaged in nude hot tubbing, as established by Findings IV.


          It was not established that the act of inviting K.G.
    and D.S. for nude therapy sessions at Harbin Hot Springs amounted
    to gross negligence, in violation of Business and Professions
    Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and 4992.3(d).

          Respondent committed gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and
    4992.3(d), when he bartered therapy for nude massages from K.G.,
    as established by Findings V.


          Respondent committed gross negligence, in violation of
    Business and Professions Code sections 2960(j), 4982(d) and


    4992.3(d) by shifting the focus of D.S.'s therapy from her
    presenting problems to his interest in ET encounters, as
    established by Findings V.


          While it may have been thoughtless, or possibly
    negligent for respondent to try to recreate a Native American
    ritual with D.S. present, it did not rise to the level of gross

          It was not established that respondent discussed with
    D.S. details of his sexual relationship with his wife.


          Determinations II - V, VII, IX and X, and each of them
    are grounds for discipline.



          The Psychologist, Licensed Social Worker and Marriage,
    Family and Child Counselor licenses issued to respondent Richard
    Boylan are revoked.


          Respondent shall pay costs to the Board of Behavioral
    Science Examiners in  the sum of  $9205/

          Dated: (August 1, 1995)

                      [Signature appears on document]
                      MURIEL EVENS
                      Administrative Law Judge
                      Office of Administrative Hearings



Richard Boylan, Ph.D. (916) 455-0120
LLC 2826 O Street, Suite 2, Sacramento, CA 95816, USA.
Regular columnist in "Contact Forum" UFO newsletter:(800)366-0264;
and Bob Dean's "Stargate Newsletter":