Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2018 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan


  • Robert L. HeilbronnerEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1017




Confidentiality is the duty owed the client, whereas privilege is the legal right held by the client, as a function of statute (in most states), with certain exceptions (mandatory reporting, express or implicit waiver, duty to protect, duty to warn; AAFP 1991). It serves as an immunity from disclosure for conversations that take place within the context of a protected relationship, such as that between an attorney and a client, a husband and wife, a priest and penitent, and a doctor (e.g., neuropsychologist) and patient. In Jaffee v. Redmond (1995), the US Supreme Court recognized a psychotherapist-patient privilege in federal common law. The Court, however, failed to define the parameters of the privilege and left the refinement of the common-law definition for the lower federal courts to make on a case-by-case basis. The Court’s decision in Jaffee v. Redmonddemonstrates the intention to establish a strong psychotherapist-patient privilege. Courts...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology. (2007). AACN practice guidelines for neuropsychological assessment and consultation. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21, 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Academy of Forensic Psychology. (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jaffe. v. Redmond 51 F.3d 1346, 1357 (7th Cir. 1995).Google Scholar
  5. Kaufmann, P. M. (2009). Protecting raw data and psychological tests from wrongful disclosure: A primer on the law and other persuasive strategies. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 1130–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (1997). Psychological evaluations for the court: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  7. National Academy of Neuropsychology. (2000). Test security: Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15, 383–386.Google Scholar
  8. National Academy of Neuropsychology Policy and Planning Committee (2003). Test security: An update. Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. See http://www.nanonline.org/NAN/Files/PAIC/PDFs/NANTestSecurityUpdate.pdf
  9. Weissman, H. N., & DeBow, D. M. (2003). Ethical principles and professional competencies. In A. Goldstein (Ed.), Handbook of psychology, Forensic psychology (Vol. 11). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chicago Neuropsychology GroupChicagoUSA