Re: Newbies, Cryptainer, privileged info

From: Arthur (Art7_at_att.not)
Date: 10/19/05

  • Next message: Arthur: "Re: Cryptainer (was Re: Newbie naive question, perhaps - - be kind)" 
    Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 16:23:59 GMT

    Jim Foyle wrote:
    > "Arthur" <Art7@att.not> wrote in message
    > news:_v94f.436759$5N3.333722@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
    >
    > [snipped cryptographic security question]
    >
    > By now I suppose you have gotten more than enough answer.

    Yes but it's beginning to get intriguing and developing a life of its
    own, thanks, thanks to comments of this group and today, you and "Matt."

      As I understand it, the law does not recognize psychiatric/patient
    > communications as privileged, as for example, lawyer/client communications.

    In Pennsylvania, at least, psychologist / psychiatrist communications
    have the same level of protection as that of attorney / client
    communications.

    > I have heard that psychiatric/patient data is subpoenaed even for divorce
    > cases.

    In personal injury cases and others, such as divorce matters, in which a
    plaintiff is claiming to have suffered psychological or cognitive
    damages, however, he or she then cannot hide behind so-called
    confidentiality laws to prevent disclosure and evaluation of such
    claims. The courts step in and out go the subpoenas. The therapist or
    neuropsychologist (me, for example) can respond with opinions that his
    testimony can be harmful to the patient, but the final decision is up to
    the courts.

    > Are therapists willing to go to jail?
    >
    Not me <g>

  • Next message: Arthur: "Re: Cryptainer (was Re: Newbie naive question, perhaps - - be kind)"

    Relevant Pages
    • Quantcast