Secrets Clutched in a Dead Hand: Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege in the Light of Reason and Experience with Other Evidentiary Privileges.

Journal of law and health Pub Date : 2024-01-01
Jason S Sunshine
{"title":"Secrets Clutched in a Dead Hand: Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege in the Light of Reason and Experience with Other Evidentiary Privileges.","authors":"Jason S Sunshine","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Attorney-client privilege was held by the Supreme Court to extend beyond death in 1996, albeit only ratifying centuries of accepted practice in the lower courts and England before them. But with the lawyer's client dead, the natural outcome of such a rule is that privilege--the legal enforcement of secrecy--will persist forever, for only the dead client could ever have waived and thus end it. Perpetuity is not traditionally favored by the law for good reason, and yet a long and broad line of precedent endorses its application to privilege. The recent emergence of a novel species of privilege for psychotherapy, however, affords an opportunity to take a fresh look at the long-tolerated enigma of eternity and the imprudence of thoughtlessly importing it to the newest addition to the family of privileges. Frankly, humanity has always deserved better than legalisms arrogating to the inscrutability of the infinite.</p>","PeriodicalId":73804,"journal":{"name":"Journal of law and health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of law and health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Attorney-client privilege was held by the Supreme Court to extend beyond death in 1996, albeit only ratifying centuries of accepted practice in the lower courts and England before them. But with the lawyer's client dead, the natural outcome of such a rule is that privilege--the legal enforcement of secrecy--will persist forever, for only the dead client could ever have waived and thus end it. Perpetuity is not traditionally favored by the law for good reason, and yet a long and broad line of precedent endorses its application to privilege. The recent emergence of a novel species of privilege for psychotherapy, however, affords an opportunity to take a fresh look at the long-tolerated enigma of eternity and the imprudence of thoughtlessly importing it to the newest addition to the family of privileges. Frankly, humanity has always deserved better than legalisms arrogating to the inscrutability of the infinite.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
死人手里攥着的秘密:根据理性和其他证据特权的经验反思遗体心理治疗师-病人特权》(Rethinking Posthumous Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege in the Reason and Experience with Other Evidentiary Privileges)。
1996 年,最高法院认为律师与委托人之间的保密特权可以延续到死亡之后,尽管这只是对下级法院和英国几个世纪以来所接受的做法的认可。但是,由于律师的委托人已经死亡,这种规则的自然结果就是特权--保密的法律执行--将永远存在,因为只有死亡的委托人才有可能放弃特权,从而终止特权。法律传统上并不支持永久性,这是有道理的,但长期以来,广泛的先例却支持将其应用于特权。然而,最近出现的一种新的心理治疗特权为我们提供了一个机会,让我们重新审视长期以来一直被容忍的永恒之谜,以及不加思索地将其引入特权家族最新成员的轻率之举。坦率地说,人类总是应该得到比傲慢地认为无限不可捉摸的法律主义更好的东西。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Ninth Amendment: An Underutilized Protection for Reproductive Choice. Distorted Burden Shifting and Barred Mitigation: Being a Stubborn 234 Years Old Ironically Hasn't Helped the Supreme Court Mature. How Bodily Autonomy Can Fail Against Vaccination Mandates: The Few vs. the Many. When Governors Prioritize Individual Freedom over Public Health: Tort Liability for Government Failures. Without Due Process of Law: The Dobbs Decision and Its Cataclysmic Impact on the Substantive Due Process and Privacy Rights of Ohio Women.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1