Psychotherapy and Disclosure: Recent Court Decisions

• Published in: Canadian journal of psychiatry Vol. 43; no. 7; pp. 731 - 736
• Main Authors: Furlong, Allannah, Lefebvre, Michèle S
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.09.1998; Canadian Psychiatric Association; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
• Subjects: Attitude of Health Personnel; Biological and medical sciences; Canada; Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence; Ethics, Professional; Federal court decisions; Humans; Legislation; Medical personnel; Medical sciences; Mental health; Patient Advocacy - legislation & jurisprudence; Privacy - legislation & jurisprudence; Professional-Patient Relations; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychopathology. Psychiatry; Psychotherapy; Psychotherapy - legislation & jurisprudence; Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry; Social Responsibility; Truth Disclosure; United States; Canada; North America; America; United States; psychotherapy; obligation to disclosure; Human; Psychotherapy; Medical confidentiality; Legislation; Professional practice
• ISSN: 0706-7437; 1497-0015
• DOI: 10.1177/070674379804300708

Objective: To encourage mental health professionals concerned about the practice of psychotherapy to add their voices to the legal debate on disclosure. Method: Analysis of recent court decisions, in particular 2 Supreme Court of Canada judgements, R. v. O'Connor and R. v. Carosella, and 1 United States Supreme Court judgement, Jaffee v. Redmond. Results: The lack of a common definition of psychotherapy may, in part, have made it awkward for mental health professionals to mount a concerted defence of psychotherapy dossiers. Conclusions: Unless mental health professionals develop a more robust justification and delimitation for privilege, in Canadian courts possible relevance of clinical material is likely to override concern for the patient's privacy interest. Future research might evaluate the impact of loss of privilege upon different types of psychotherapy.