MeoW333
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2006
- Messages
- 4,761
- Reaction score
- 81
It is extremely unethical for a psychiatrist to give out information about a patients conversations with the psychiatrist. Any time law enforcement wants access to the file they have to subpoena it.
This ethical standard is kept because if patients fear the psychiatrist turning them in they won't be honest with their psychiatrist and that greatly inhibits any kind of progression in the therapy.
I'm 99.9% sure that if a therapist knows that a crime is going to be committed that they have to legally inform the police.
I'm not sure if past crimes are covered by that too.I don't think they are.
If i recall right, i don't think therapists can do much about past crimes. Even if the person hasn't been caught for them. A lot of times they may have delusional patients who confess to all sorts of things, so it would be worthless to check into past confessions.
Anything involving the present that could put their patient or others in danger that is spoken about, then the therapist should order a 72 hour evaluation.
I question the ethics of Dr. Victoria Fetter, as she should have put Seitz in for 72 hour eval as soon as he started mentioning his feelings for little boys and showed her or talked about his drawings. The least she could have done is called another psychiatrist for their opinion on what to do about the matter (she wouldn't have to name the patient to do this) at least she would get a second opinion if she wasn't sure about putting him in 72 hour herself. IMO, his feelings and obsessions with children would potentially put children in danger, and i would have put him in a 72 hour right away.
Dr Fetter should have did the 72 hour evaluation as soon as he started talking about his fantasies. Children could have potentially be endangered.