Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health Confidentiality And Reporting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel explains confidentiality limits: child-abuse reporting and duty to warn
Summary
On-air attorneys explained that communications with psychiatrists or psychologists are generally privileged, but Montana law requires reporting of child abuse and there are limited duties to warn third parties under cases like Tarasoff.
Missoula — During the Dial-A-Lawyer broadcast, panelists explained that communications with mental-health professionals are generally confidential but that Montana law mandates reporting when a child is the victim of abuse, and that clinicians may have a duty to warn in narrow circumstances.
A caller asked whether psychiatrists or psychologists are “obligated to tell” authorities if a crime is discussed in therapy. Karen Townsend and other panelists said that Montana imposes mandatory reporting obligations for crimes involving child abuse, including sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect; in those circumstances professionals must report to the Family Services Division. For other offenses, Townsend said “generally what you tell a psychiatrist or a psychologist is confidential.”
Panelists also discussed the Tarasoff line of cases (State v. Tarasoff from California), which they described as creating an obligation in some jurisdictions to warn identifiable potential victims when a clinician believes a patient poses a direct, specific threat. Panelists said that duty tends to arise only for a “pretty direct threat” rather than vague statements and is driven by the clinician’s concern about civil liability for failing to warn.
The on-air comments were general legal explanation; callers with specific concerns were advised to consult counsel and mental-health professionals. No formal legal advice or reporting action occurred on air.
