Can therapists ask clients for Google reviews?

Not your clients, if you belong to APA, ACA or NASW. All three codes bar therapists from soliciting testimonials from current clients and from anyone vulnerable to undue influence, and the ACA code adds former clients by name. None of them defines whether a Google review is a testimonial, so the careful reading treats a review request as solicitation. Below is what each code says, what California adds, and what to do instead.

The codes and the California rules quoted here were read on October 21, 2026. This is marketing guidance, not ethics or legal advice for your license.

What the three codes actually say

Three differences matter when you sit down to write a review request:

• Former clients. ACA names them. APA and NASW don’t, but a former client of a therapist can still be someone “vulnerable to undue influence”, and neither code says where that ends.
• Reusing what a client already wrote. NASW counts “solicitation of consent to use a client’s prior statement as a testimonial endorsement” as solicitation. Asking a current client whether you can quote their review is the thing it bars.
• Using any testimonial. ACA adds that counselors “discuss with clients the implications of and obtain permission for the use of any testimonial”, even one nobody asked for.

The APA code says membership commits members to its standards, and that violations can also bring sanctions from “psychology boards, other state or federal agencies, and payors for health services,” members or not.

Is a Google review a testimonial?

None of the three codes defines the word, and the ACA glossary has no entry for it. That leaves room for argument. It also leaves no rule saying a review is exempt.

The closest thing to an answer from inside the profession is a 2015 Counseling Today column by Rob Reinhardt, published in ACA’s magazine. His view on reviews and testimonials: “They offer an equal likelihood of compromising confidentiality/privacy or causing harm.” He went further and asked whether simply listing a practice on a review site “equate[s] to soliciting reviews,” while noting that “a business can end up listed on such sites involuntarily.”

That is one author’s reading from 2015, not ACA guidance. As a working rule, though, it holds up: if a request would be off limits for a website testimonial, treat it as off limits for a Google review. That rules out:

• A review link in the session-reminder text or the intake packet.
• “If you’ve found our work helpful, we’d love a review” at the end of a session.
• A sign in the waiting room with a QR code to your profile.
• Software that texts clients a review link after each appointment.

Asking colleagues instead: the Google catch

The usual workaround is to ask colleagues. Reinhardt wrote that “nothing prevents us from soliciting such statements from colleagues and other professionals who are familiar with our work,” because there is no client privacy to protect, as long as it is “abundantly evident that the reviewer is not a current or past client.”

The ethics codes may allow it. Google’s policy is a separate problem. Its Maps content policy says contributions “should reflect a genuine experience at a place or business,” bars merchants from soliciting content “that does not represent a genuine experience,” and lists “professional or personal affiliations” and “industry competitors” as conflicts of interest. A colleague who refers to you, or who practices down the street, fits that list, and Google removes what it finds.

So split it:

What California adds

California’s Board of Behavioral Sciences licenses LMFTs, LCSWs, LPCCs and LEPs. Its rules don’t mention reviews, but three of them touch your profile and website. These were read in the board’s January 2026 statutes book. California psychologists answer to a different board, which wasn’t checked, and no other state was checked.

• What counts as advertising. Business and Professions Code §651 covers “any form of public communication,” including any “list or directory of healing arts practitioners, Internet, or other electronic communication.” A Google Business Profile is an internet listing, so read it as covered.
• Testimonials. §651(b)(8) treats as misleading “any statement, endorsement, or testimonial that is likely to mislead or deceive because of a failure to disclose material facts.” A colleague endorsement that doesn’t say the person is a colleague is that kind of omission. A §651 violation is a misdemeanor and grounds for discipline.
• The license line. 16 CCR §1811, in the version operative since April 1, 2026, requires “in any advertisement” your first and last name as filed with the board, the license title or an accepted abbreviation (LMFT, LCSW, LPCC, LEP), and the license number. Registered associates must also name their employer and state “that they are supervised by a licensed person.”

Confidentiality is written into the same law: failing to keep client information confidential is unprofessional conduct under §4982(m) for LMFTs, §4992.3(n) for LCSWs and §4999.90(m) for LPCCs.

Replying to a review without confirming a client

Clients will review you without being asked. The hard part is the reply box, because any reply to a review signed by a client tells the reader that person was a client.

The codes point the same way. ACA H.6.d: counselors “take precautions to avoid disclosing confidential information through public social media.” NASW 1.07®: avoid “posting any identifying or confidential information about clients on professional Web sites or other forms of social media.” APA 4.01 covers confidential information “stored in any medium.”

HIPAA applies on top of that if your practice is a covered entity. In 2023 HHS settled with Manasa Health Center, a New Jersey adult and child psychiatric practice, which “impermissibly disclosed the PHI of four (4) patients in response to their negative reviews posted on Google Reviews.” It paid $30,000 and accepted a two-year corrective action plan, including written privacy policies and a revised privacy notice that covers posting on its website and social media. The dental cases, and the wording that stays generic, are covered in how dentists write HIPAA-compliant review replies.

For a therapy practice, the simplest stance is the one Reinhardt suggested: don’t reply to any review, and say so in public. A statement in your profile description and on your website might read:

1. Because of our duty of confidentiality, we don’t respond to any online review, positive or negative.
2. If you have a concern about your care, please contact us directly so we can address it.
3. If you do post, think about protecting your privacy, for example with a different name and email address.

Saying nothing to a five-star review is also a reply policy. Applied to every review, it confirms nothing about anyone.

What to do instead of asking

Reviews are one input Google names, not the only one. Its help page lists three factors for local results: relevance (“how well a Business Profile matches what someone is searching for”), distance, and prominence, which is “based on info like how many websites link to your business and how many reviews you have.” It also says “there’s no way to request or pay for a better local ranking.”

Here is what that leaves for a practice that doesn’t ask:

• Complete the profile. Google: “Make sure your business info is as complete as possible.” That means the primary category, your hours, telehealth if you offer it, and the description with the review statement above.
• Match the searches. Relevance comes from what the profile and your site say. A page for each thing you treat (anxiety, couples work, teens) gives Google something to match a search against.
• Carry the license line everywhere. Put your name, license title and number on every page and on the profile. California requires it, and it’s what a cautious client looks for.
• Earn links, not ratings. Directory listings, a group practice page, a talk you gave at a school: Google names links to your business as part of prominence.
• Show colleague endorsements on your own site, labeled with each person’s role.

What the codes don’t settle

ACA’s revision task force says the revised code will be published in fall 2026. Until then, the 2014 code quoted here is the one in force. Re-read C.3.b when the new version is out.

Your state board’s rules decide what is enforceable for your license. Only California was read for this post. Check whether your board’s rules adopt or quote an association code, because then its testimonial standard is part of your board’s rules. If you hold more than one license or membership, follow the strictest rule that applies.

Write the practice’s decisions on one page: no review requests by anyone in the practice, no replies, who holds the Google login, and what happens when a client offers to write a review. Then put your effort into the profile and the pages. LocalBiz can handle that part while the reply box stays empty.