By Ryan Michaels | The Maine Mirror

A formal licensing complaint packet filed against Christina L. Codere, a licensed social worker employed as an Investigations Supervisor with Maine’s Office of Child and Family Services (OCFS), has been made available. The packet, designated Complaint No. 2025-SOC-20907 by the Maine Department of Professional and Financial Regulation’s Office of Professional and Occupational Regulation, Complaint Division, centers on allegations by Ryan Michaels concerning Codere’s conduct in connection with child-protection matters involving Michaels and the children’s mother, Marisol Guerrero.

The materials include an acknowledgment letter to the complainant, a notice of complaint to the licensee, the online complaint form submitted by Michaels, an introductory summary of nine labeled exhibits, email correspondence spanning 2024 and 2025, photographs of physical injuries, and medical documentation. Codere holds License No. LS7745, which expires February 28, 2026. The complaint was submitted via the state’s online form on August 2, 2025. As of the August 18, 2025 correspondence in the packet, the matter remains at the initial stage of the administrative process: the licensee has been directed to provide a detailed response and related records by September 20, 2025. Information received during the investigation is confidential while the matter is pending, pursuant to 10 M.R.S. § 8003-B.

The packet does not contain any determination by the Board of Social Worker Licensure, any finding of misconduct, or any response from Codere. All characterizations of events below are drawn directly from the documents Michaels submitted or from official letters issued by the Complaint Division.

August 2025: Formal Filing and Official Acknowledgment

On August 18, 2025, the Complaint Division sent Michaels an acknowledgment letter confirming receipt of the complaint against Codere. The letter states that a copy would be forwarded to the licensee for response by September 20, 2025, and that Michaels would then have 15 days to reply if a response is received. A parallel notice of complaint was emailed the same day to Codere at christina.codere@maine.gov. That notice requests a detailed written response addressing each concern or allegation, along with “copies of all assessments, evaluations, psychosocial histories, treatment plans, session or progress notes, termination summaries, and any other documentation pertaining to the period of treatment.” It notes that the records request is made in connection with health-oversight activities and may be disclosed without client consent under applicable federal and state provisions. The notice further states that, absent a compelling reason related to client safety, a copy of any response will be provided to the complainant. (Image: August 18, 2025 Notice of Complaint letter on state letterhead addressed to Christina L. Codere.)

The complaint form itself identifies Michaels as the patient/client and Codere as an individual licensee. In the narrative section Michaels writes: “I am submitting a formal licensing complaint against Christina Codere, LSW, based on documented evidence of misconduct, retaliation, and supervisory negligence that has harmed my children and violated professional ethics. Please see the attached document, which contains a full narrative, supporting evidence, and nine labeled exhibits.” Supporting files listed include an introduction and summary plus Exhibits A through I.

The Complainant’s Introductory Summary of Exhibits

The packet’s principal narrative document, titled “Introduction to Exhibits and Summary of Complaint,” describes Codere as an Investigations Supervisor within OCFS and states that the nine exhibits “document a sustained pattern of professional misconduct, ethical violations, retaliatory behavior, and supervisory negligence under Ms. Codere’s direction.” Michaels writes that the materials are drawn from communications with OCFS, government officials, and law enforcement, and that additional documentation is available upon request. He characterizes himself as a 100 percent disabled veteran and asserts that the conduct “has not only endangered my parental rights and personal well-being \ldots but has also had lasting consequences for the safety and emotional health of my children.”

Each exhibit summary in the introduction links specific email threads or incidents to claimed violations of social-work ethical standards concerning transparency, impartiality, duty to protect, recordkeeping, and mandated reporting. The summaries are the complainant’s framing; the underlying emails and attachments appear later in the packet.

April 2024: Email Chains Documenting Safety Concerns and Requests for Written Communication

The bulk of the contemporaneous correspondence falls in late March and early April 2024. Exhibit A is described as a multi-day email chain among Michaels, Codere, caseworker Chelcie Stewart, and various state officials. According to the summary, the exchange shows Codere and Stewart declining to place key discussions in writing; Codere is quoted in the summary as stating she does not want to communicate over email or text. Michaels reports documented physical injuries including a skull fracture, traumatic brain injury, and a visible bullet graze, and asserts that OCFS focused scrutiny on him while declining to investigate allegations concerning the children’s mother.

Exhibit B concerns an April 24, 2024 written follow-up by Codere that, according to Michaels, accused him of “yelling and swearing” during a telephone call. Michaels’ rebuttal, included in the packet, states that he was speaking from a loud production environment at Pratt & Whitney, had requested a different call time, and did not yell or swear at the workers, though he acknowledges using a single expletive in frustration. He characterizes Codere’s framing as exaggerated.

Exhibits C, D, and E cover overlapping April 1–11, 2024 correspondence. In one thread Michaels reports that his sons said their mother yelled at them and broke a toy gun, instructed them not to talk about events in her home, and made statements about him that he describes as false. He repeatedly requests a formal safety plan and references prior recordings and third-party witnesses. The introduction states that “no one responded, acknowledged, or acted on the information.”

A central exchange begins April 1–2, 2024. Codere writes that “at this point, we do not have any immediate safety concerns in regards to the mother’s treatment of the children” and that the reports “do not rise to a level of making a finding against the mother.” She and Stewart request medical releases concerning Michaels’ reported traumatic brain injury, noting that police had indicated the incident “did not result in you being shot.” Codere states a preference for discussing matters by Zoom or in person rather than email or text: “We are not having this conversation on email/text.” Michaels replies that the refusal to engage in writing raises transparency concerns and attaches medical photographs and records showing facial trauma, wrist lacerations, abdominal bruising, and emergency-department documentation. (Image: April 2, 2024 email from Christina Codere stating there are no immediate safety concerns regarding the mother and requesting medical releases.)

On April 3, 2024, Michaels forwards the exchange to senior OCFS leadership, including Bobbi Johnson, Dean Bugaj, Tara Williams, and others, with Codere and Stewart copied. He writes that “CPS is failing to take a stand against Marisol, who has a documented track record of being found guilty of domestic violence,” and that “Christina’s refusal to respond in writing \ldots raises serious concerns about transparency and accountability.” Johnson replies the same day confirming receipt and stating she will follow up with district staff. (Image: April 3, 2024 email from Ryan Michaels to OCFS leadership titled “Urgent: Request for Intervention Regarding CPS Inaction and Misconduct.”)

Later 2024 and 2025: Appeal Attempts, Birthday Message, and Alleged Misstatements

Exhibit H addresses an October 18, 2024 attempt by Michaels to file an appeal of CPS findings in person because of mental-health challenges. According to the summary, Codere insisted the appeal be mailed to Augusta even though the deadline was that day. Subsequent emails requesting the status of an administrative hearing received no reply. The exhibit also includes screenshots dated July 15, 2025, that Michaels states show Codere and Stewart viewing his personal Facebook stories during work hours.

Exhibit F concerns March 4–5, 2025 emails in which Michaels attempts to deliver a birthday message to his son Maddox, copying Stewart, Codere, the OCFS ombudsman, and state officials including Governor Janet Mills. The summary states that no confirmation was received that the message was shared, and that a follow-up plea the next morning likewise went unanswered.

Exhibits G and I relate to a March 11, 2025 incident. Exhibit G describes a recorded conversation in which Biddeford Police Officer Shortill is said to have contradicted statements by OCFS Director Jean Haynes justifying a no-trespass order against Michaels on the basis of alleged disorderly conduct and more than 100 phone calls in a single day. Michaels asserts that Codere was included in prior email chains and that the behavioral concerns cited originated under her supervision. Exhibit I contains Michaels’ July 2025 written requests to Amy Cilley seeking clarification of statements allegedly made to law enforcement that Michaels was “out of touch with reality” and questioning his disability status. Codere is copied on the requests; the summary states she did not respond or intervene. Michaels attaches documentation of his 100 percent VA disability rating and states that witnesses and body-camera footage contradict the reported characterization.

Procedural Posture and Invitation to Review the Source Materials

The August 18, 2025 letters establish that the Board of Social Worker Licensure has received the complaint, that Codere has been notified and given a deadline to respond with records, and that the investigation remains confidential while pending. No findings, disciplinary actions, or determinations appear in the packet. The complaint form and exhibits constitute Michaels’ allegations and supporting documentation; they have not been adjudicated.

Readers are invited to examine the complete complaint packet reproduced below and to review the original documents themselves. Support independent journalism by subscribing for free below.