The ethical and legal implications of Jaffee v Redmond and the HIPAA medical privacy rule for psychotherapy and general psychiatry.
The 1996 Jaffee v Redmond US Supreme Court decision established a privilege for psychotherapeutic communications in the federal courts. The new privilege has both substantive and symbolic importance. In its strongly worded opinion in Jaffee v Redmond, the US Supreme Court made clear that confidentiality in psychotherapy takes precedence over certain other important societal goals. The new Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) medical privacy rule promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services relies on Jaffee v Redmond in providing additional legal protections for confidential psychotherapy. Both the US Supreme Court's Jaffee v Redmond ruling and the HIPAA rule support the ethical protection of confidentiality of conversations between psychiatrists and patients.
Mosher
Paul W
PW
George Washington University Law School, 2000 H St. N.W., Washington, DC 20052, USA. paul@mosher.com
Swire
Peter P
PP
D003219:Confidentiality / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D020408:Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000628:therapy; D008605:Mental Health Services / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations / Q000941:ethics; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011613:Psychotherapy / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D035521:Supreme Court Decisions; D014481:United States