Confidentiality after referral: A study of how restrictions on disclosure affect relationships between therapists and referral sources.

Birky, Ian; Sharkin, Bruce S.; Marin, Joe; Scappaticci, Andrew

doi:10.1037/0735-7028.29.2.179

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, therapists must understand that they may compromise a patient's assertion of the privilege by disclosures to third parties (Corcoran & Winslade, 1994). Even routine disclosures, such as completing insurance forms (Green, 1995), communicating with a referral source (Birky, Sharkin, Marin, & Scappaticci, 1998), completing commitment documents (Slovenko, 1997b), or obtaining a consultation with a colleague may waive confidentiality and frustrate a privilege claim. These communications may render the information public and thus are not protected.…”

Section: Implications Of Jaffee For Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Jaffe v. Redmond's impact: After the Supreme Court's recognition of a psychotherapist–patient privilege.

Shuman¹,

Foote²

1999

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States Supreme Court's recognition of a psychotherapist-patient privilege in its 1996 decision in Jaffee v. Redmond was assumed by many mental health professionals to signal an era of greater legal respect for the work of psychotherapists and the importance of protecting therapist-patient communications from judicial intrusion. In this article, the authors review the short-term impact of Jaffee and offer strategies for therapists to address concerns with the confidentiality of therapist-patient communications.When the United States Supreme Court rendered its decision in Jaffee v. Redmond (1996), many mental health professionals expressed relief that the Court had recognized both the existence and the importance of a privilege limiting judicially compelled disclosure of therapist-patient communications (DeBell & Jones, 1997;Remley, Herlihy, & Herlihy, 1997). Three years have passed since that decision, providing the opportunity to examine, in the shortterm, how the Court's recognition of a psychotherapist-patient privilege has changed the law and affected psychological practice. This article addresses the legal legacy of Jaffee, assesses its impact on confidentiality and privilege for psychotherapy, and offers strategies for therapists to address these issues in therapy.Although the Court's decision recognizing a psychotherapistpatient privilege reinforces the critical role of mental health care, practically, its impact on the law and psychological practice is limited by numerous factors. Jaffee v. Redmond (1996) only addresses the law of privilege in cases tried in federal court governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975). It has no legal authority in state court cases, where most psychotherapist-patient privilege DANIEL W. SHUMAN received his JD from the University of Arizona in 1972. He is a professor of law at Southern Methodist University School of Law and an adjunct professor of psychiatry at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Dallas. His research interests include ethical, evidentiary, liability, and mental health law policy issues. WILLIAM FOOTE received his PhD in psychology from the University of New Mexico in 1978. He is an adjunct professor of law at the University of New Mexico School of Law, and he is a psychologist in independent practice, working actively in both civil and criminal cases.

show abstract

Section: Implications Of Jaffee For Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%