Are Non-Competes Enforceable for Therapists and Behavioral Health Staff in Michigan?

Michigan enforces non-competes that pass a statutory reasonableness test.

MCL 445.774a says an employer may obtain from an employee an agreement or covenant that protects the employer's reasonable competitive business interests, provided it is reasonable as to duration, geographical area and the type of employment or line of business.

Two features shape how that plays out in a practice.

There is no income threshold and no notice requirement in the statute, so a covenant with a front-line RBT is judged by the same reasonableness test as one with a clinical director — reasonableness, not salary, is the constraint.

And if a covenant is unreasonable in any respect, the statute lets a court limit it to render it reasonable and specifically enforce it as limited.

For how Michigan compares nationally, see our guide to non-competes nationally.

Michigan's rule is statutory.

MCL 445.774a sits in the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (Act 274 of 1984) and was added by 1987 Act 243.

It applies to covenants entered into after March 29, 1985 — every covenant you would draft today.

The official Michigan Compiled Laws page, complete through PA 103 of 2026, showed no later amendment as of October 7, 2026 — the statute a Michigan practice drafts against is the 1987 text.

Settled is not the same as simple to apply.

The statute states the standard but does not score your clause for you; that judgment belongs to a court, on the facts of the covenant and the hire.

What Michigan courts have said about these clauses beyond the statute's text is outside what this guide covers, so put case-law questions to Michigan employment counsel.

There is no behavioral health carve-out in MCL 445.774a.

The statute contains no exception for health care or mental health professionals, and our research found no Michigan statute specifically restricting non-competes for counselors, social workers, marriage and family therapists, psychologists, behavior analysts, physicians or nurse practitioners as of October 7, 2026.

That means one general reasonableness rule covers every clinical employee: a licensed counselor, an LCSW, a BCBA, a psychiatrist and a psychiatric nurse practitioner are all judged against the same statute, with no profession-specific ceiling or exemption in MCL 445.774a.

Two limits on that finding.

Our research covered the non-compete statute and a search for profession-specific restrictions, not every title of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and pending 2025–2026 Michigan bills were not checked one by one — so confirm the current landscape with Michigan employment counsel before relying on it.

And which states do write profession-specific bans naming behavioral health licenses, and whom those cover, is national context: see our guide to non-competes nationally.

Michigan's test has two parts, both in the statute.

The covenant must protect the employer's reasonable competitive business interests, and it must be reasonable as to its duration, geographical area and the type of employment or line of business.

Each of the three is a reasonableness question, not a fixed rule — the statutory standard names no term of months or a mile radius.

So tie every number to something real about the hire: a duration that matches the interest you are protecting, a geography that tracks where this clinician actually worked or served clients, and a scope limited to the type of work they did for you rather than every service line you operate.

The interest half matters just as much.

Before the clause goes into an offer, write down what you would lose if this clinician left and set up across town, and be honest about whether a court would call it a competitive business interest.

If the clause is still unreasonable in some respect, MCL 445.774a says a court may limit the agreement to render it reasonable and specifically enforce it as limited.

The narrowing power is in the statute — but a covenant rewritten by a judge may not be the one you drafted, so aim the original at what a court would enforce.

Our research for this page covered Michigan's non-compete statute, not how Michigan courts treat client and employee non-solicitation clauses — put that question to Michigan employment counsel before you lean on a non-solicit as your only protection.

What you can plan around is what the tools are.

A non-solicitation clause binds the clinician's conduct — restricting solicitation of your clients, referral sources or staff — while a non-compete restricts whether and where they work at all.

A client who wants to follow a departing therapist remains free to: these clauses bind the signer, not the client.

The interests overlap: MCL 445.774a measures a non-compete against the employer's 'reasonable competitive business interests', and a non-solicit aims at the client and referral relationships themselves.

The statute's text does not list which interests qualify, and how Michigan courts weigh client relationships and referral sources was not part of our research.

What the ethics codes expect when a clinician departs — informing clients of their options, avoiding abandonment — is covered in our guide to non-solicitation clauses.

Draft to the statute's test, not past it.

Pick a duration tied to the interest you can name, a geography tied to where this clinician served clients, and a scope limited to the work they did for you.

With no income threshold or notice requirement in the statute, the discipline is a covenant you can justify hire by hire — not one template in every offer.

Watch the contractor question, especially in an ABA clinic.

MCL 445.774a's text speaks of agreements between an employer and an employee; independent contractors are not mentioned.

How Michigan courts treat covenants with contractors was outside our research — a real gap where clinics staff with contract BCBAs, so get counsel's read before relying on a covenant there.

Protect what a covenant cannot reach.

A confidentiality clause covering schedules, fee structures, records practices and business information restrains disclosure rather than practice, so it can cover the whole roster.

And if the worry is paying to train a clinician who then leaves, a training repayment agreement is a different tool with its own enforceability rules — see our guide to training repayment agreements before adding one to an offer.

Finally, hand the covenant over with the offer rather than at the signing table, and have Michigan employment counsel read the final wording.