I have a question, to which some of you may know the answer. If a psychiatrist learned through the course of his sessions that one of his clients was a serial killer (like Tony Soprano's shrink), a murderer who wasn't going to stop, what would his/her legal requirements be? Does doctor/patient privilege in reality (not just tv) cover this situation? At what point would the doctor be legally obligated to break confidentiality? Would confidentiality continue after the client stopped coming to sessions, or after the client's death?

HAPPY BIRTHDAY SUMI!!!

Happy birthday, Sumi! Is it cakeful yet?

Ooh, I would like to know those answers, too, Zenkitty!

...no reason.

I'm pretty sure the limit of confidentiality is harm to self or others. I'm not certain how it covers someone telling his psychologist what he did do, but I'm nearly certain that the psychologist has an obligation to tell the police if the patient says he's going to hurt somebody.

From the FAQ on a friend's therapy site:

In general, the law protects the confidentiality of all communications between a client and a psychotherapist. Information is not disclosed without written permission. However, there are number of exceptions to this rule.

Exceptions include:

•Suspected child abuse or dependant adult or elder abuse. The therapist is required by law to report this to the appropriate authorities immediately.

•If a client is threatening serious bodily harm to another person or persons, the therapist must notify the police and inform the intended victim.

•If a client intends to harm himself or herself, the therapist will make every effort to enlist their cooperation in insuring their safety. If they do not cooperate, further measures may be taken without their permission in order to ensure their safety.

That's what I thought too, Hil. But what if the client says he has harmed people, never says he plans to again, but the doctor knows he most likely will? Like, again, with Soprano's shrink, she must have known he'd killed people, and that he would do it again, even if he was smart enough never to say so.

eta Just read you, megan. I'm getting that it's a matter of "clear and present danger", then, and the doctor's informed opinion isn't enough to send him to the police, without a direct statement from the client. Like, he knows, but has neither evidence, threat, nor confession, and thus can't do anything.

I'm not certain how it covers someone telling his psychologist what he did do, but I'm nearly certain that the psychologist has an obligation to tell the police if the patient says he's going to hurt somebody.

What if the psychologist has a time machine? Say he goes into the future and his patient tells him of a murder he committed. Should the psychologist go back into the past and prevent the murder?

Sorry, I just woke up from a nap.

Stood and danced (along with the entiree audience) for the whole They Might be Giants concert last night and it was fabulous! Today we gardened and pruned in the front yard, so it no longer looks derelict. Am now at work and feeling exhausted. We bailed on friends we have season tickets with to go see Parade tonight since both DH and I have seen it before and we are both just too tired from all of our pogoing and pruning.

tommy, stop helping me!