Seattle "Life Coach" Herman H. Lucke, Ph.D., Surrendered His Missouri Psychology License in 2017 after Being Charged with Unethical Conduct

June 1, 2021

Herman H. Lucke, Ph.D. is listed on LinkedIn as located in the Seattle area, providing “International consulting & coaching in Psychotherapy and Cognitive Behavior Therapy.”

He is also found online listed as a licensed psychologist in Missouri. However, as of February 2017, Lucke was no longer licensed in Missouri or any other state.

Lucke is an unlicensed “life coach” or personal consultant. This, though legal, is completely unregulated by the state of Washington and most, if not all other states. Hence, patients who have complaints against such practitioners have no recourse short of a lawsuit or a police report. 

BACKGROUND

On February 22, 2017, Lucke entered into a Settlement Agreement with the Missouri State Committee of Psychologists to surrender his psychology license. The Committee’s document states that “Herman Lucke, in lieu of discipline, shall surrender his right to practice psychology in the State of Missouri, and further, he shall relinquish any right he has to restore his license…. This Voluntary Surrender in Lieu of Discipline shall be reportable discipline.”

It’s a bit confusing but what it means is that he agreed to surrender his license instead of fighting the charges and having to submit to disciplinary measures imposed by the Committee. Regardless, the action of Surrender is nonetheless a disciplinary action.

The Committee charged Lucke with the following (as stated in the Settlement Agreement): 

• Incompetency, misconduct, gross negligence, fraud, misrepresentation or dishonesty
• Violation of any professional trust or confidence
• Being guilty of unethical conduct

These charges stemmed from a complaint the Committee received regarding Lucke engaging in an “inappropriate relationship with a client.”

DETAILS OF THE COMPLAINT

On or about January 20, 2014, the Committee received a complaint regarding Lucke from “R.V.”

R.V.'s complaint alleged that Lucke was involved in an inappropriate relationship with a client, “V.P.” The complaint also alleged that Lucke "did not do any meaningful therapy for V.P. while she was his client."

R.V. also alleged that he observed text messages between Lucke and V.P. that he believed were "inappropriate" and V.P. acknowledged to him (R.V.) that she was having "a personal relationship" with Lucke while she was Lucke's client.

On March 10, 2014, the Committee received Lucke's written response to R.V.'s complaint. He stated that YP was still his patient. He described the January 16, 2014, incident in the complaint. He stated he had not been to V.P.'s residence prior to that day or after it. He stated he heard "a heavy struggle inside." He stated V.P. called out to him to help her He stated he called the police prior to going to her home. He stated that "as soon as I knew [V.P.] started drinking, shortly after January 13, [he] assisted her in obtaining treatment for her alcohol problem." He denied having a "personal or unprofessional" relationship with V.P.

On April 1, 2014, Division of Professional Registration, Central Investigative Unit Investigator Kevan Lager met with R.V., who stated that he was V.P.'s coworker and that he used to be a licensed social worker. He stated he became friends with V.P. over time and she confided in him about "psychological and emotional problems." R.V. stated that V.P. told him she had been in treatment with Lucke for the last five years. RV stated that V.P. did not report for work on January 14 or 15, 2014, so he went to her apartment to check on her. R.V. stated he found her "intoxicated, lying on the couch and unable to stand on her own." He stated that while he was there, V.P. received a text message from Lucke that stated "thinking of last night" and that Lucke "loved her." R.V. stated that he typed back to Lucke on V.P.'s phone that he was going to report him to the APA. R.V. stated he was at V.P.'s apartment when Lucke arrived and he "exchanged some words" with Lucke. R.V. stated that V.P. called out for Lucke because he (R.V.) did not want to let Lucke in her apartment. R.V. stated he had not seen her since that night and was "only trying to help her." R.V. denied any other motIve or sexual relationship with V.P.

On April 11, 2014, Investigator Lager interviewed V.P., who stated she worked with R.V. and had befriended him because he was "safe" and she needed someone to drive her to appointments and work as she'd lost her driver's license as a result of multiple DUI convictions. She stated that R.V. "had put more into their relationship" than she and that he was controlling. She stated that on the morning of January 16, 2014, R.V. was in her apartment without her knowledge. She stated she had relapsed and was very intoxicated. She stated that R.V. was upset and yelling at her and began pushing her around. She stated she called Lucke for help because R.V. was demanding sex. She stated she did call out for Lucke when he arrived but denied anything but a professional relationship with him. She stated they did text message each other but it was also professional. She stated Lucke testified in court on her behalf to try and get her driver's license back and wrote a report her attorney used in court.

On May 16, 2014, Investigator Lager met with Lucke. Lucke stated his treatment of V.P. began as family therapy and then individual counseling. He stated he was treating her for PTSD and alcohol dependency. He stated that he did communicate with V.P. by text message He stated on January 16, 2014, he received a voice mail from V.P. indicating she was in distress. When he texted her, he stated he received a message back that led him to believe something was wrong so he went to her apartment after calling 911. He stated when he arrived, V.P. asked for his help. He stated he advised R.V. that the police were on the way. He stated he attempted to get V.P. to "go to detox" prior to the January 16 incident but she would not. On that day, she did agree to go. He stated that he maintained a professional relationship with her. He stated he was helping her with her legal problems including testifying for her in March 2014 and writing a report on her behalf regarding restoring her driver's license.

Lucke also provided his client records for V.P. Lucke's record for November 15, 2013 states that V.P. had consumed alcohol for several days and was going to the hospital. Lucke described it as a "set back."

On the same day, Lucke's notes reflect that V.P.'s criminal lawyer was requesting a letter from him regarding her therapy. The file also contained a letter Lucke wrote to the attorney dated November 20, 2013, in which Lucke stated that V.P.'s last withdrawal crisis was June 2013 and that she was "in full remission."

The file also contained a letter dated January 12, 2014, to the judge in V.P.'s case. In the letter to the judge, Lucke stated she had "maintained 100% sobriety for more than five months." [Psychcrime note: This letter to the judge was false and Lucke knew it, as he later admitted--see below.]

On December 4, 2014, Lucke appeared before the Committee at their regularly scheduled meeting. Regarding the patient note on November 15, 2013, Lucke stated that he wrote "definitely intoxicated" in his notes of the session because "of [her] slurred speech and the way she was talking.” He stated he later found out she was sick. He stated he did not go back and change his notes from that day. Likewise, other patient notes did not reflect that she was not drinking. He stated that a note from November 25, 2013, stated "stop drinking, continues with migraine. Able to quit after two days, two or three." The notes also said "[g]reat progress considering alcohol use for a few days" He stated he wrote all this but only spoke with her on the phone. He stated he should have reported to the judge or changed the letter he wrote regarding how long she had been sober. He stated he was not certain she was drinking and to tell the judge anything other than he did if he was not certain would be too damaging to the patient. He stated if he had known she was drinking, he "maybe" could have communicated with the judge and "I admit that is something that I should have done. I didn't do it because I was too busy." Lucke stated he remembered telling the investigator that she had been drinking but he does not remember exactly why he said that. He stated that in his professional opinion, he should have told the judge about her relapse. Lucke also stated he had a great deal of empathy for V.P. He stated he did not document all text messages and phone calls with clients.

Source: Settlement Agreement between the Missouri State Committee of Psychologists and Herman Lucke, effective February 22, 2017, URL: https://pr.mo.gov/boards/psychology/discipline-past/Lucke,%20Herman%2001499.pdf