TSBEP Inaction

Citizens reported the substantiated fraud and misconduct of a Texas psychologist.

Other professionals reviewed the psychologist’s evaluations; they identified violations and unsound scientific methodologies. Other professionals involved in the cases refuted the psychologist’s opinions and reports of events.

TSBEP has been investigating multiple complaints against one psychologist since 2015 yet has taken NO ACTIONS of which we are aware.


Ignores Petition from Hundreds of Texans

Dismisses Substantiated Complaints

Refuses to Enforce Psychologist to Release Client Records

TSBEP Ignores Petition from Hundreds of Texans


The petition described a pattern of misconduct and fraud committed by one (1) Texas psychologist identified by numerous professionals in dozens of cases.

  • false diagnoses with insufficient scientific support
  • lack of objectivity
  • gross errors and omissions
  • cherry-picked information to mislead
  • biased, irrelevant collateral witnesses (and disregarded relevant, objective witnesses)
  • blamed the victim of domestic abuse; disregarded and minimized the perpetrator’s abusive behaviors
  • employed unsound methodologies and practices
  • did not comply with court-ordered scope
  • engaged in dual relationships
  • and much more …

TSBEP Did NOT Discipline Psychologist & Dismissed Valid Complaints


TSBEP has been investigating this licensee (who was a former TSBEP ethical reviewer) since at least 2015 and repeatedly dismissed complaints about this psychologist. It’s still investigating numerous complaints against this licensee.

Known Complaints Against This Texas Psychologist

Dismissed with No Disciplinary Actions
Pending Investigation
8 Complaints (2015-2018)
7 Complaints (2019-current)

Note: There may be more complaints since this psychologist conducted hundreds of forensic evaluations in Texas. These are only the citizens who happened to find one another.

TSBEP will not investigate repeated patterns of misconduct presented in multiple complaints against a single licensee.

TSBEP will not release information on complaints received and its investigative activity. The public is only apprised if and when disciplinary actions are taken.

TSBEP Refuses to Enforce Parent’s Rights to Records


TSBEP refuses to uphold parents’ rights to their own mental health records when a psychologist refused to release records upon written requests. By doing so, the TSBEP and the psychologist disregard Texas law and TSBEP codes.

Citizens are denied access to their own mental health records, and are thwarted from submitting complaints with evidence.


Texas Law, TSBEP Rules & Signed Contracts Require Psychologist to Release Records


Excerpt from the psychologist’s signed contracts:

“RELEASE OF FILE. Both attorneys will be cc’d on correspondence about substantive issues arising in your case. Section 107.112 of the Texas Family Code indicates that we are required to make available a copy of our file related to your case for either attorney/party that requests such. The code does not mandate the requirement of a subpoena for these records and as such, if such a request is made, we will provide a copy to each side without a subpoena, unless the court issues an order restricting such disclosure.”


Darrel Spinks, TSBEP Director, refused to help citizens obtain records.

“[the psychologist] is under no obligation under TSBEP rules to provide you with any records because you were neither her patient nor a client. See the definitions of those terms under Board rule 465.1. In fact, the court that appointed Dr. Sherry is considered her client under our rules”

from Darrel Spinks, TSBEP Director



Texas Law, TSBEP Rules, and Signed Contracts ALL Refute Spinks


TSBEP Director Spinks refuses to enforce Texas Family Code and TSBEP Rules.


Texas Family Code § 107.112 (c) Mandates Release of Records 


“Except for records obtained from the department in accordance with Section 107.111, a private child custody evaluator shall, after completion of an evaluation and the preparation and filing of a child custody evaluation report under Section 107.113, make available in a reasonable time the evaluator’s records relating to the evaluation on the written request of an attorney for a party, a party who does not have an attorney, and any person appointed under this chapter in the suit in which the evaluator conducted the evaluation, unless a court has issued an order restricting disclosure of the records.”


TSBEP Rules Mandate Release of Records (§465.18 Forensic Services)


“Licensees shall comply with the requirements of Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §107.112  regarding:
(i) the disclosure of communications between evaluation participants;
(ii) the creation and retention of records relevant to the evaluation; and
(iii) access to evaluation records.”


Spinks claims that parents are not “clients” and thus, have no rights to their own records. However:

  • The court did not retain and sign the psychologist’s contracts—parents did.
  • The court did not pay the psychologist for services—parents did.

Both of these facts indicate that the parents (not the court) are the client in a contractual relationship.

Parents can be compelled to sign contracts and pay psychologists whatever fees psychologists set. Parents may also sign an agreement for a forensic evaluation that is later filed with the court. However, this does not mean that the court becomes the client as the court is not a party to the contract.

The psychologist’s contracts defines the client as follows.

“The client is the retaining attorney in a consultation relationship and the examinees are the litigants named in the court order in an evaluation relationship unless otherwise agreed upon in writing or by court order.”

The contract refutes TSBEP’s claim that the court is the client and instead, states that the retaining attorney is the client.  For pro se parents (in the absence of an attorney), who is the client according to the contract? If the TSBEP does not recognize the parent as the client, it would be discriminating against pro se parents.

Spinks referenced TSBEP Rule 465.1, which defines three (3) terms.

— “Client” means a party other than a patient seeking or obtaining psychological services, as defined in §501.003 of the Occupations Code, for a third-party with the goal of assisting or caring for that third-party or answering a referral question through the use of forensic psychological services.
— “Licensee” means a licensed psychologist, provisionally licensed psychologist, licensed psychological associate, licensed specialist in school psychology, applicants to the Board, and any other individual whom the Board has the authority to discipline under these Rules.
— “Patient” means a person who receives psychological services, as defined in §501.003 of the Occupations Code, regardless of whether the patient or a third- party pays for the services. The term “patient” shall include a client if the client is a person listed in §611.004(a)(4) or (5) of the Health and Safety Code who is acting on a patient’s behalf. A person who is the subject of a forensic evaluation is not considered to be a patient under these rules.


All parties must fall under one of the definitions Spinks cited. Clearly, the parents are not the Licensee. Yet, Spinks also claims that they are neither the Client nor the Patient. When the only definition that applies to the parent is the Client. As such, parents have rights to their mental health records.

Spinks refused to speak with us any further, or help citizens in any way to obtain their own mental health records as mandated by law and required by contracts.

“Please understand I’m not going to engage in a debate with you via email, but a court is clearly included under our definition of client.  You were technically an examinee, but that is not a defined term under our rules … you are not a patient or client under our rules. I cannot do any better than point you to our rules, and the definitions in them and I will not entertain any further discussion on these topics.”

from Darrel Spinks, TSBEP Director

Note: This documentation has been copied to us and can be provided via a request to txfamilycourtcorruption@gmail.com.

Do Darrel Spinks and TSBEP’s actions serve the best interest of the children

More about HIPAA and federal laws.