Who is Sofia Ann-Buitron Drotts? California juvenile detention therapist arrested for sex with underage client

Sofia Ann-Buitron Drotts, 26, of San Francisco, is facing multiple felony charges after prosecutors alleged she engaged in a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old former client under her care.Sofia Ann-Buitron Drotts earned a psychology degree from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. (Instagram | uwmadisonls)The former behavioral health clinician has been charged in Contra Costa County with seven felony counts. The charges include oral copulation of a person under 18 years of age, sending harmful matter to a minor and possession of child sexual abuse material, according to the Contra Costa County District Attorney's Office.The victim's family has also filed a lawsuit against Contra Costa County as a result of the case, alleging that the county failed to shield the adolescent from alleged abuse and grooming.Authorities said Concord Police arrested Drotts on July 14 after receiving a tip from a probation department supervisor. She has not entered a plea, and the Contra Costa Superior Court is expected to schedule her arraignment.Also read: Patrick Clancy net worth: Microsoft salary, earnings in focus amid Lindsay Clancy murder trialWho is Sofia Ann-Buitron Drotts?According to publicly available information cited by multiple news outlets, Drotts is originally from Chicago and later moved to California to pursue graduate studies.She earned a psychology degree from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. A university social media post in 2022 congratulated her on graduating and stated that she planned to pursue a PhD in Clinical Psychology at Palo Alto University.Drotts was employed as a mental health clinician at the John Davis Juvenile Detention Center in Martinez prior to her arrest. She offered counseling services to young people detained there. She allegedly served as the victim's therapist while he was incarcerated, according to the prosecution.Also read: Who is Patrick Clancy’s new wife, Rachel Danis? What we know as lawyer reveals remarriage in Lindsay Clancy caseWhat do prosecutors and the victim's family allege?According to prosecutors, the alleged sexual relationship began after the teenager was released from juvenile detention. However, the family's attorney, John Burris, alleged the grooming started while the victim was still incarcerated and was 17 at the time.In the claim filed against Contra Costa County, the family alleged Drotts built an inappropriate emotional relationship with the teenager during therapy sessions.According to Burris, Drotts misused her role as the boy's therapist throughout the two years he was detained at the juvenile hall to develop an improper emotional bond with him and prepare him for sexual assault.Over the course of many phone conversations, Drotts also planned to gain the victim's mother's trust by telling her that her son was improving while he was behind bars, the New York Post cited.That relationship continued even after the victim was released, as she worked for him as a county therapist. The media outlet reported that Drotts and the victim met illicitly in the mother's car and in her San Francisco apartment.Burris said, “Drotts would participate in these meetings with the mother, and she would speak in glorious details about how well he was doing, and at the same time she was having secret meetings with him.”The attorney also alleged Drotts concealed the relationship by maintaining contact through a burner phone and, at times, posing as the teenager's girlfriend. According to Burris, Drotts also urged the victim to disobey his curfew and skip school. Burris claimed that his mother was unaware of the boy's destination when he eventually reached the location where he was spending the night away.The victim's mother said in a statement released through her attorney that the family had trusted the therapist with her son's care. “We trusted this professional with our son's healing and well-being, and that trust was fundamentally shattered,” she said.Contra Costa Health acknowledged the filing in a statement but declined further comment, citing an active legal and personnel matter.