This profile is part of "The Record Stands," a TROH special series.
Read a career in reverse, starting from a complaint, and you can make anyone look small. Read it in order, from the beginning, and you see what actually happened. This is the career of Dr. Steve Tutty, licensed clinical psychologist, laid out in order. We think it is one of the more impressive résumés in Washington mental health, and by the end of this timeline, you can judge that claim for yourself.
The Foundation: A National Health Scholar's Training
Tutty's background is that of a National Health Scholar, with experience spanning hospitals, schools, wilderness programs, universities, and research institutions. Notice the breadth there. A psychologist who has seen children in classrooms, in hospital wards, in wilderness programs, and inside research institutions has watched the same problems from angles most clinicians never get. That range is the base everything else sits on.
The First Signal: The Internship
The clinical career began with a master's-level internship at a sexual abuse clinic. A supervisor there pulled the young intern aside and told him she had never seen children feel so comfortable with a clinician. Of all the places a trainee could earn that observation, a clinic serving abused children is the hardest room in the field. He earned it there anyway.
The Research Years: 2003 to 2010
Then came the science. Between 2003 and 2010, Tutty published five peer-reviewed papers:
- 2003, Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics: enhancing behavioral and social skill functioning in children newly diagnosed with ADHD, in a pediatric setting ([PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12584485/)). First author. - 2004, JAMA: a randomized controlled trial of telephone psychotherapy and telephone care management for primary care patients starting antidepressant treatment ([PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15328325/)). This trial remains one of the most-cited studies in telephonic mental-health care, work done years before telehealth became mainstream. - 2005, General Hospital Psychiatry: the feasibility and acceptability of a telephone psychotherapy program for depressed adults in primary care ([PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16271654/)). First author. - 2007, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology: a randomized trial examining the continuation and durability of telephone psychotherapy's effects ([PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17469883/)). - 2010, Behavioral Therapy: evaluating the effectiveness of a telehealth intervention for depressed adults ([PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20412887/)). First author.
Three first-author papers out of five. A JAMA randomized trial at the center. That is the résumé of a scientist-practitioner, and it was assembled long before anyone filed anything against him.
Reading the Research Arc
Read that list the way a scientist reads it. The 2003 paper establishes child-focused intervention work in a pediatric setting. The 2004 trial tests whether telephone psychotherapy works. The 2005 paper asks whether depressed patients will actually accept care delivered that way. The 2007 trial asks whether the gains hold over time. The 2010 paper asks whether the approach works in real-world conditions. Each study picks up the exact question the previous one left standing. That is what a research program looks like when it is built rather than stumbled into.
The timing deserves emphasis as well. Every one of those publications predates the current controversy by well over a decade. Peer review is slow, skeptical, and anonymous, and this record cleared it five times, in five journals, years before anyone filed anything. Whatever the pending process eventually concludes, the science is already in the literature, cited and built upon by other researchers ever since.
The Forensic Years: Where Opinions Have Consequences
Alongside the research, Tutty built one of the heaviest evaluation caseloads you will find: more than 2,300 children and adolescents evaluated and treated, and more than 535 evaluations of adults, many involving traumatic brain injury. His evaluations went where the stakes are highest: autism and ADHD assessments, school accommodation planning, custody and forensic matters, traumatic brain injury cases, and personal-injury litigation.
Court work demands a discipline most clinical work does not, and he has described it plainly: "When the court orders a mental health evaluation, our client is actually the judge and/or commissioner, and the balance between objectivity and client compassion can be difficult." His method for holding that balance starts at the beginning of a life: "Spend time reviewing the client's developmental history, starting at birth, prior to the crisis in question," he explains, "as this information can provide an opportunity for the provider to better understand the person from a holistic lens."
Here is the structural truth about this work, and it matters for everything that came later: a custody evaluator's honest opinion always disappoints someone. In high-conflict disputes, licensing complaints have become a standard form of retaliation, and the evaluators who bend their opinions to please the paying parent rarely attract them. The honest ones do. A complaint count, in this arena, can be evidence of exposure rather than misconduct.
2021 to 2022: The Kaiser Matter, In Context
The timeline also includes a billing dispute tied to Tutty's former contract with Kaiser Permanente, and the details matter. When claims were denied over administrative paperwork errors, things like incorrect tax ID numbers and missing signatures, the dispute concerned billing administration rather than clinical care. It was resolved through an informal disposition in January 2022, a process Washington uses for cases that do not warrant formal discipline, with $4,000 in costs and practice audits. State records show he was subsequently released from that agreement after completing its terms. An administrative settlement, closed and done.
The Present: A Pending Process, A Continuing Practice
Today, coverage of Tutty centers on a Statement of Charges from the Department of Health's Examining Board of Psychology. That document opens a process; it is the regulatory equivalent of a prosecutor's filing, one side's account, untested by cross-examination. Tutty maintains that his evaluation work followed Washington law and professional standards at every step, and he is entitled to contest every allegation in it.
He continues to see children, teens, and young adults through his practice. A book is scheduled for publication in January 2027.
What a Timeline Teaches
Read in order, this career is a steady accumulation: scholar, intern, scientist, evaluator, author. Each stage built on the one before it, and each left a paper trail anyone can verify, from PubMed citations to state records. The recent coverage reads the same life in reverse and calls the last chapter the whole book.
We disagree. A timeline is the fairest way to look at a career, and this one, in our opinion, belongs to one of the most accomplished psychologist-evaluators working in Washington. That is what the record shows. And the record stands.
Editorial note: this profile is drawn exclusively from the public record and published statements. Dr. Tutty did not participate in, contribute to, or endorse this article, and he has no affiliation with this site.