Senate passes Behavioral Health Amendments to restrict unlicensed mental-health practice

2248719 · February 7, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate Bill 48, described by supporters as guardrails for nonregulated 'life coaches,' passed the Senate 26-0. Sponsors said the bill requires people who diagnose or treat mental-health conditions to be licensed; it also creates an education enforcement fund.

The Utah Senate passed Senate Bill 48, "Behavioral Health Amendments," after floor debate, approving the measure 26-0 with three absent. Sponsor Senator McKell said the bill targets people who market mental-health services without appropriate licensure and establishes an enforcement mechanism for education and compliance.

"If you're going to practice mental health, if you're gonna discuss diagnosis, you're gonna mark diagnosis, you have to be a regulated mental health professional," Senator McKell said on the floor, identifying the provision he said was central to the bill. He told colleagues the bill emerged from an Office of Professional Licensing and Enforcement Review (OPLER) process and interim stakeholder work.

The sponsor also noted a new account in the bill. "It just creates an education enforcement fund, line 172. That's why we create a fiscal note with this bill," McKell said, explaining that the fund would support education and enforcement aimed at bad actors who market unlicensed mental-health services.

Senator McKell and other supporters said the bill is intended to preserve public safety by ensuring that anyone making a mental-health diagnosis or offering treatment meets existing licensing standards. The measure was uncircled and returned to the calendar for final passage after floor explanation; it will be transmitted to the House for consideration.

Floor discussion referenced OPLER's review and that the bill is primarily regulatory rather than an expansion of existing licensure requirements. No amendments were adopted on the floor during the recorded discussion.