Statutory privilege for psychologists
• A psychologist licensed under this article may not disclose any information acquired from persons with whom the psychologist has dealt in a professional capacity, except under the following circumstances:
(1) Trials for homicide when the disclosure relates directly tothe fact or immediate circumstances of said homicide.
(2) Proceedings the purpose of which is to determine mental competency, or in which a defense of mental incompetency is raised.
(3) Actions, civil or criminal, against a psychologist formal practice.
(4) Upon an issue as to the validity of a document such as a will of a client.
(5) If the psychologist has the expressed consent of the client or subject, or in the case of a client's death or disability, the express consent of the client's legal representative.
(6) Circumstances under which privileged communication is abrogated under the laws of Indiana.
• This statutory privilege applies only to certified psychologists, and not to psychological caseworkers.
See Hulett v. State, 552 N.E.2d 47, 49 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990)
• The statutory psychologist/patient privilege is held by the patient or her legal representative, and may only be asserted by her or her representative. It may not be used as a weapon by one accused of raping her to prevent the introduction of otherwise admissible evidence of the rape.
Goodwin v. State, 573 N.E.2d 895, 897 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991)
• Indiana's psychologist-patient privilege applies only to certified psychologists.
Matter of L.J.M., 473 N.E.2d 637, 642 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985)
Statutory for school psychologists
• A school psychologist who is endorsed under this chapter may not disclose any information acquired from persons with whom the school psychologist has dealt in a professional capacity, except under the following circumstances:
(1) Trials for homicide when the disclosure relates directly to the fact or immediate circumstances of the homicide;
(2) Proceedings to determine mental competency, or in which a defense of mental incompetency is raised;
(3) Civil or criminal actions against a school psychologist for malpractice;
(4) Upon an issue as to the validity of a document;
(5) If the school psychologist has the express consent of the client or, in the case of a client's death or disability, the express consent of the client's legal representative; OR
(6) Circumstances under which privileged communication is lawfully invalidated.
• We recognize that there are compelling reasons to protect disclosures made to anyone who offers counseling services. The legislature, however, has chosen to extend a privilege to only two groups of counselors, certified psychologists and school counselors. We are thereby precluded from applying either privilege to caseworkers7 at juvenile shelter care facilities.
Matter of L.J.M., 473 N.E.2d 637, 642 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985)(footnote omitted)
More on the exceptions
• Unless the homicide exception applies, any communication between the psychologist and patient is privileged and not discoverable. (“Unless the homicide exception applies, any communication between Center's psychologist and the Pelley family is privileged and not discoverable.”)
State v. Pelley, 828 N.E.2d 915, 920 (Ind. 2005)
• A hearing on requiring a juvenile delinquent to register as a sex offender gave rise to the “catch all” part of the statute exceptions of when the privilege does not protect communications. The court found that evaluations by appointed psychologists for the purpose of determining whether the juvenile would commit another sex offense fall into this exception.
See T.W. v. State, 953 N.E.2d 1120, 1124-25 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011)