Although in many states the clergy enjoy certain legal protection of privileged communications that psychotherapists do not, their legal position may have many limitations. Pastoral counselors need to join with other mental health professionals in securing a broadly defined psychotherapist-patient privilege for therapeutic communications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenJ. G., “Implications of Research in Self-Disclosure for Group Psychotherapy,”International Journal of Croup Psychotherapy, 1973, 23, 306–321.
2.
American Association of Pastoral Counselors, Report of the AAPC Legislation Committee on Confidential Privileged Communications and State Regulation of Professions (September, 1972).
3.
American Psychiatric Association, “The Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry,”The American Journal of Psychiatry, 1973, 130, 1058–1064.
4.
American Psychological Association, Casebook on Ethical Standards of Psychologists (Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1967).
5.
BeiglerJ. S., “The 1971 Amendment of the Illinois Statute on Confidentiality: A New Development in Privilege Law,”The American Journal of Psychiatry, 1972, 129, 311–315.
6.
“Binder v. Ruvell, No. 52C2535, Circuit Court of Cook County, 1952,”Journal of the American Medical Association, 1952, 150, 1241–1242.
7.
“Confidential Communications to a Psychotherapist: A New Treatment Privilege,”Northwestern University Law Review, 1952, 47, 384–389.
8.
CramerA. A., “Go Tell the People? The Ethics of Pastoral Confidentiality,”Pastoral Psychology, 1966, 17, 42.
9.
CrossW., “Privileged Communications between Participants in Group Psychotherapy,”Law and the Social Order, 1970, 7970, 191–211.
10.
DiamondB. L., and WeihofenH., “Privileged Communication and the Clinical Psychologist,”Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1953, 9, 388–390.
11.
DunhamD. W., “Testimonial Privilege in State and Federal Courts: A Suggested Approach,”Willamette Law Journal, 1973, 9, 26–53.
12.
“Evidence—Privileged Communications—A Psychiatrist Has No Constitutional Right to Assert an Absolute Privilege against Disclosure of Psychotherapeutic Communication,”Texas Law Review, 1971, 49, 929–942.
13.
“Evidence—Privileged Communications in Divorce Actions: Psychiatrist-Patient and Presence of Third Parties,”Tennessee Law Review, 1972, 40, 110–118.
14.
FisherR. M., “The Psychotherapy Professions and the Law of Privileged Communications,”Wayne Law Review, 1964, 10, 609–654.
15.
FriesenD. D., “Confidentiality and the Pastoral Counselor,”Pastoral Psychology, 1971, 22, 48.
16.
“Functional Overlap between the Lawyer and Other Professionals: Its Implications for the Privileged Communications Doctrine,”Yale Law Journal, 1962, 71, 1226–1273.
17.
GeiserR. L., and RheingoldP. D., “Psychology and the Legal Process: Testimonial Privileged Communications,”American Psychologist, 1964, 19, 831–837.
18.
GoldsteinA. S., and KatzJ., “Psychiatrist-Patient Privilege: The GAP Proposal and the Connecticut Statute,”The American Journal of Psychiatry, 1962, 118, 733–739.
19.
“Group Therapy and Privileged Communication,”Indiana Law Journal, 1967, 43, 93–105.
20.
HenryW. E.SimsJ. H. and SprayS. L., The Fifth Profession: Becoming a Psychotherapist (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1971).
21.
HollenderM. H., “Privileged Communications and Confidentiality,”Diseases of the Nervous System, 1965, 26, 169–175.
22.
HoltR. R., “Summary and Prospect: The Dawn of a New Profession,” in HoltR. R. (Ed.), New Horizon for Psychotherapy: Autonomy as a Profession (New York: International Universities Press, 1971), pp. 312–411.
23.
KeeffeA. J., “The Snafu Blocking Federal Evidence Rules,”American Bar Association Journal, 1973, 59, 1055–1056.
24.
KinsellaJ. K., “Confidentiality and Drug Education,”International Journal of the Addictions, 1971, 6, 609–614.
25.
KlinkT. W., “Documents and Reports on Privilege and Confidentiality,”Pastoral Psychology, 1966, 17, 42.
26.
KlinkT. W., “Pastoral Confidences: A Modern Dilemma,”Pastoral Psychology, 1966, 17, 3.
27.
KuhlmannF. L., “Communications to Clergymen—When Are They Privileged?,”The Journal of Pastoral Care, 1970, 24, 30–46.
28.
KruseC. B., “The Role of the Clergyman in the Coerced Confession,”Pastoral Psychology, 1966, 17, 9.
29.
LouisellD. W., “The Psychologist in Today's Legal World: Part II,”Minnesota Law Review, 1957, 41, 73–746.
30.
MykelN., “The Application of Ethical Standards to Group Psychotherapy in a Community,”International Journal of Croup Psychotherapy, 1971, 21, 248–254.
31.
National Conference of Lawyers and Social Workers, Confidential and Privileged Communications: Guidelines for Lawyers and Social Workers, Publication No. 7 (New York: National Conference of Lawyers and Social Workers, 1968).
SlovenkoR., “Psychiatry and a Second Look at the Medical Privilege,”Wayne Law Review, 1960, 6, 175–203.
40.
SlovenkoR., Psychotherapy, Confidentiality, and Privileged Communication (Springfield, III.: Charles C. Thomas, 1966).
41.
“A State Statute to Provide a Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege,”Harvard Journal on Legislation, 1967, 4, 307–324.
42.
StoylesJ., “The Dilemma of the Constitutionality of the Priest-Penitent Privilege—The Application of the Religion Clauses,”University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 1967, 29, 27.
43.
SuarezJ. M., and HuntJ., “Patient-Litigant Exception in Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege Cases: New Considerations for Alaska and California since In re Lifschutz,”U.C.L.A.—Alaska Law Review, 1971, 1, 2–20.
44.
WaltzJ. R., and InbauF. E., Medical Jurisprudence (New York: Macmillan, 1971).
45.
WatsonA.S., “Levels of Confidentiality in the Psychoanalytic Situation,”Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1972, 20, 156–176.
46.
WellesD. R.Jr., “Violare Inviolabile: The Ethical Paradox of the Confessional Seal,”Pastoral Psychology, 1966, 17, 22.
47.
WigmoreJ. H., Evidence in Trials at Common Law, Vol 8, McNaughtonJ. T. revision (Boston: Little, Brown, 1961).
48.
ZiskinJ., “Privileged Communication: A Note on the Lifschutz Case,”Professional Psychology, 1971, 2, 202–204.
