Opinion ID: 462280
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The D.C. Mental Health Information Act

Text: 63 As an element of both his FTCA action and his request for equitable relief, Doe claimed that the VA's disclosure of his psychiatric records violated the District of Columbia Mental Health Information Act of 1978, D.C. Code Secs. 6-2001--6-2062. Section 6-2002(a) of the Act provides that: 64 No mental health professional, mental health facility, data collector, or employee or agent of a mental health professional, mental health facility or data collector shall disclose or permit the disclosure of mental health information to any person, including an employer. 65 The Act defines a data collector as any person (including a government agency or part thereof) who regularly engages in the practice of assembling or evaluating client mental health information, D.C. Code Sec. 6-2001(4), and creates both civil, Sec. 6-2061, and criminal, Sec. 6-2062, liability for certain types of violations. Section 6-2075 of the act provides, however, that [n]othing in this chapter shall be construed to necessarily require or excuse noncompliance with any provision of any federal law. 66 The district court never determined whether the VA's disclosure of Doe's records came within the terms of this statute. Instead, it held that inasmuch as this section can be read to be inconsistent with the federal statutes and regulations permitting disclosure, the local law must yield to the federal law and regulations. J.A. at 109. The law that the district court saw as conflicting was, of course, the provisions of the Veterans' Records Statute that it held allowed disclosure here. In light of our determination that the Veterans' Records Statute did not allow this disclosure, we remand to the district court the question of whether the Mental Health Information Act prohibited the disclosure in this case, and what, if any, effect its violation has on Doe's various requests for relief.