Defamation due to breach of confidentiality
Hypothetical: I say negative stuff about John Doe to my psychologist, stuff which isn't defamation per se. My psychologist doesn't directly act on my statements, but does share my statements with third parties. Due to those statements those third parties cancel contracts with John Doe, stop buying products from John Doe, etc.
Could I use as a defense against defamation the fact that I thought my statements to John Doe wouldn't be shared with anyone?
united-states defamation confidentiality
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
add a comment |
Hypothetical: I say negative stuff about John Doe to my psychologist, stuff which isn't defamation per se. My psychologist doesn't directly act on my statements, but does share my statements with third parties. Due to those statements those third parties cancel contracts with John Doe, stop buying products from John Doe, etc.
Could I use as a defense against defamation the fact that I thought my statements to John Doe wouldn't be shared with anyone?
united-states defamation confidentiality
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Hypothetical: I say negative stuff about John Doe to my psychologist, stuff which isn't defamation per se. My psychologist doesn't directly act on my statements, but does share my statements with third parties. Due to those statements those third parties cancel contracts with John Doe, stop buying products from John Doe, etc.
Could I use as a defense against defamation the fact that I thought my statements to John Doe wouldn't be shared with anyone?
united-states defamation confidentiality
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
Hypothetical: I say negative stuff about John Doe to my psychologist, stuff which isn't defamation per se. My psychologist doesn't directly act on my statements, but does share my statements with third parties. Due to those statements those third parties cancel contracts with John Doe, stop buying products from John Doe, etc.
Could I use as a defense against defamation the fact that I thought my statements to John Doe wouldn't be shared with anyone?
united-states defamation confidentiality
united-states defamation confidentiality
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
edited 2 hours ago
Nij
2,10031226
2,10031226
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
asked 7 hours ago
Matthew ClineMatthew Cline
1113
1113
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago
add a comment |
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Yes.
Making statements in a legally protected confidential context is not publishing them, and in most jurisdictions, defamation must be published to create a cause of action. In such a case the patient might well have a cause of action against the therapist for violation of patient confidentially, and a complaint to the relevant authority could get the therapist's license revoked, or perhaps a censure from the licensing authority, whatever it is the the jurisdiction.
Note "published" does not have to mean putting them in print, but does mean making them in such a way that general circulation of them is plausible.
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
add a comment |
No
Let’s assume that what you say to your psychologist is false and causes damage to John Doe.
Making the statement to the psychologist is the defamatory act.
Assuming the psychologist does not defame John, that is, she just reports that you said what you said then John has a case against you only.
You can sue your psychologist for breach of confidence, probably for the full amount John gets from you but her breach is not a defense for you.
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
add a comment |
Possibly
Qualified privilege is a defense in defamation. The statement would have to have been made without malice, be made in an appropriate situations and for a reasonable cause. If making the mistaken accusation, under assumptions of confidentiality, is reasonably related to the therapeutic goals of your sessions with the psychologist, it could be. The question is whether freely communicating the belief is critical to a reasonable purpose (such as getting your head straightened out).
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38619%2fdefamation-due-to-breach-of-confidentiality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Yes.
Making statements in a legally protected confidential context is not publishing them, and in most jurisdictions, defamation must be published to create a cause of action. In such a case the patient might well have a cause of action against the therapist for violation of patient confidentially, and a complaint to the relevant authority could get the therapist's license revoked, or perhaps a censure from the licensing authority, whatever it is the the jurisdiction.
Note "published" does not have to mean putting them in print, but does mean making them in such a way that general circulation of them is plausible.
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
add a comment |
Yes.
Making statements in a legally protected confidential context is not publishing them, and in most jurisdictions, defamation must be published to create a cause of action. In such a case the patient might well have a cause of action against the therapist for violation of patient confidentially, and a complaint to the relevant authority could get the therapist's license revoked, or perhaps a censure from the licensing authority, whatever it is the the jurisdiction.
Note "published" does not have to mean putting them in print, but does mean making them in such a way that general circulation of them is plausible.
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
add a comment |
Yes.
Making statements in a legally protected confidential context is not publishing them, and in most jurisdictions, defamation must be published to create a cause of action. In such a case the patient might well have a cause of action against the therapist for violation of patient confidentially, and a complaint to the relevant authority could get the therapist's license revoked, or perhaps a censure from the licensing authority, whatever it is the the jurisdiction.
Note "published" does not have to mean putting them in print, but does mean making them in such a way that general circulation of them is plausible.
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
Yes.
Making statements in a legally protected confidential context is not publishing them, and in most jurisdictions, defamation must be published to create a cause of action. In such a case the patient might well have a cause of action against the therapist for violation of patient confidentially, and a complaint to the relevant authority could get the therapist's license revoked, or perhaps a censure from the licensing authority, whatever it is the the jurisdiction.
Note "published" does not have to mean putting them in print, but does mean making them in such a way that general circulation of them is plausible.
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
answered 6 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
15.4k3361
add a comment |
add a comment |
No
Let’s assume that what you say to your psychologist is false and causes damage to John Doe.
Making the statement to the psychologist is the defamatory act.
Assuming the psychologist does not defame John, that is, she just reports that you said what you said then John has a case against you only.
You can sue your psychologist for breach of confidence, probably for the full amount John gets from you but her breach is not a defense for you.
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
add a comment |
No
Let’s assume that what you say to your psychologist is false and causes damage to John Doe.
Making the statement to the psychologist is the defamatory act.
Assuming the psychologist does not defame John, that is, she just reports that you said what you said then John has a case against you only.
You can sue your psychologist for breach of confidence, probably for the full amount John gets from you but her breach is not a defense for you.
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
add a comment |
No
Let’s assume that what you say to your psychologist is false and causes damage to John Doe.
Making the statement to the psychologist is the defamatory act.
Assuming the psychologist does not defame John, that is, she just reports that you said what you said then John has a case against you only.
You can sue your psychologist for breach of confidence, probably for the full amount John gets from you but her breach is not a defense for you.
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
No
Let’s assume that what you say to your psychologist is false and causes damage to John Doe.
Making the statement to the psychologist is the defamatory act.
Assuming the psychologist does not defame John, that is, she just reports that you said what you said then John has a case against you only.
You can sue your psychologist for breach of confidence, probably for the full amount John gets from you but her breach is not a defense for you.
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
answered 3 hours ago
Dale MDale M
55.8k23579
55.8k23579
add a comment |
add a comment |
Possibly
Qualified privilege is a defense in defamation. The statement would have to have been made without malice, be made in an appropriate situations and for a reasonable cause. If making the mistaken accusation, under assumptions of confidentiality, is reasonably related to the therapeutic goals of your sessions with the psychologist, it could be. The question is whether freely communicating the belief is critical to a reasonable purpose (such as getting your head straightened out).
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
add a comment |
Possibly
Qualified privilege is a defense in defamation. The statement would have to have been made without malice, be made in an appropriate situations and for a reasonable cause. If making the mistaken accusation, under assumptions of confidentiality, is reasonably related to the therapeutic goals of your sessions with the psychologist, it could be. The question is whether freely communicating the belief is critical to a reasonable purpose (such as getting your head straightened out).
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
add a comment |
Possibly
Qualified privilege is a defense in defamation. The statement would have to have been made without malice, be made in an appropriate situations and for a reasonable cause. If making the mistaken accusation, under assumptions of confidentiality, is reasonably related to the therapeutic goals of your sessions with the psychologist, it could be. The question is whether freely communicating the belief is critical to a reasonable purpose (such as getting your head straightened out).
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
Possibly
Qualified privilege is a defense in defamation. The statement would have to have been made without malice, be made in an appropriate situations and for a reasonable cause. If making the mistaken accusation, under assumptions of confidentiality, is reasonably related to the therapeutic goals of your sessions with the psychologist, it could be. The question is whether freely communicating the belief is critical to a reasonable purpose (such as getting your head straightened out).
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
answered 1 hour ago
user6726user6726
61.3k455106
61.3k455106
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38619%2fdefamation-due-to-breach-of-confidentiality%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What jurisdiction is this in? What country, and if it is a federal country, what state or province?
– David Siegel
6 hours ago