Counsellors and psychotherapists are calling for statutory regulation in the UK to protect the public from abuse, according to a report hailed as a “watershed moment” for the profession. Unlike doctors, midwives and osteopaths, “psychotherapist” and “counsellor” are not protected titles nor statutorily regulated in the UK, meaning anyone can call themselves a therapist without a qualification and continue practising after misconduct.
Professional bodies unite for regulation
The report, the culmination of an independent review launched in October 2025 by the Commission for the Future of Counselling and Psychotherapy, marks the first time professional bodies representing counsellors and psychotherapists have called for statutory regulation. They argue it would boost confidence in the profession and protect the public from growing cases of abuse and malpractice.
The report argues that counsellors and psychotherapists are an untapped resource that could fill a mental health treatment gap estimated at about 1.8 million people on waiting lists. Practitioners told the commission they had extra capacity, which the report estimated could cumulatively provide more than 370,000 hours of additional therapy appointments every week.
Watershed moment for the profession
Commission co-chair Phil Hope, a former Labour minister for care services, said: “For me, the report became a bit of a watershed moment for the profession, a real landmark of the opportunity there is for the government, and all its departments really, to unlock that potential.”
Ella Janneh, who successfully sued her therapist in the high court for rape and sexual assault in 2024 and has campaigned for regulation with the support of law firm Leigh Day, welcomed the “collective call for regulation”. She said it had taken “years and a lot of honest and difficult conversations between victims, other campaigners and conscientious professionals”.
“Statutory regulation would lock abusive and unethical people out of the system. The current lack of centralised regulation allows for repeat offenders to continue practising with no oversight. That is reason enough to bring in regulation,” Janneh said. The report cites her “powerful testimony” as an illustration of the “devastating, ongoing impact” the absence of statutory regulation can have, since her therapist is still able to practise despite the outcome of her civil case.
Compelling case for change
The report’s co-chair Andrea Sutcliffe, former chief executive of the Nursing and Midwifery Council, said: “We’ve been on a journey around regulation with counselling and psychotherapy over many, many, many years, and the coalition government set its face against statutory regulation in 2011.” She added that “as independent co-chairs, we feel that a compelling case exists”.
Sutcliffe said regulation was especially important because therapy is a complex intervention requiring years of training, takes place one-on-one, most practitioners are independent with no employer oversight, and patients are typically vulnerable. She noted that the lack of regulation contributed to misconceptions and mistrust, preventing people from seeking help.
The report also argues that the evidence base for counselling and psychotherapy should be improved, noting that its lack is resulting in “insufficient and unsustainable public commissioning and investment”. Hope said commissioners in the NHS and local government often had “legitimate concerns, is this a qualified psychotherapist or not?”
The commission hopes the report’s call will be taken up by policymakers. Labour MP Sojan Joseph, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on mental health, said he supported the case for statutory regulation and would raise the issue in parliament. Jon Levett, the UK Council for Psychotherapy’s chief executive officer, said he would welcome statutory regulation that “protects the public, sets clear standards and preserves people’s choice of therapy”, while Dr Lisa Morrison, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy’s chief regulation and standards officer, agreed that collaboration was key to ensure regulation “places public protection, public benefit and public confidence at its heart, while avoiding barriers to access, diversity and established practice”.
