Board Takes Step Toward Revoking Psychologist's License

Boston Globe/September 15, 1985
By Judy Foreman

The board of registration of psychologists has voted to issue a new order to show cause why the license of Newton psychologist Peter Lawrence Gill should not be revoked.

Friday's action comes nearly two years after the board began investigating a complaint against Gill by a former patient. Gill resigned his Massachusetts psychology license in July, but the board did not accept his resignation because of the unresolved complaint. In July, the board dismissed an order to show cause against Gill following a ruling by Sarah Luick, administrative magistrate for the Massachusetts Division of Administrative Law Appeals.

The previous complaint charged that Gill improperly encouraged his patients to function as therapists. A new complaint is being prepared by the board.

Luick ruled that the show cause order failed to substantiate with adequate detail the charges brought against Gill by ex-patient Wallace Ralston of Newton.

In May, Gill founded a religious group called the Society of Natural Science, which has included Gill's older organization, the Cambridge Psychotherapy Institute. Both are based at Gill's Newton home.

Gill's attorney, Paul Gitlin, could not be reached for comment. A second Newton psychologist, Leonard Weiner, was also the subject of board attention when a former patient, Rachel Cann, asked the board to revive a complaint against him. Weiner was found guilty of malpractice by a jury in a 1982 civil suit charging him with improper sexual conduct.

In a prepared statement, the board said, "At (yesterday's) conference, Ms. Cann, through her attorney, Daniel Burnstein, agreed to supply the board with documentation to help the board in its deliberations. The board will make its decision regarding the disposition of this complaint following a review of the entire matter."

Weiner's attorney, John Bourgeois, said Friday, "I will defer at this time from making any comment concerning this matter until I have the advantage and the benefit of all the evidence that was presented to the board, in view of the fact that this matter has been dismissed several times.