Court Opinion

ID: 9589087
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:41:23.606629+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:53:14.568960
License: Public Domain

Deen, Presiding Judge,
concurring specially.
While full concurrence with Divisions 1, 2, and 3 and in the judgment is appropriate, certain comments should be made with reference to Division 4 of the majority opinion.
If one is a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist, communications are privileged. OCGA §§ 43-39-16 and 24-9-24. Where, as here, the witness performed individual psychotherapy but was unlicensed, we *187have held that the communications were not privileged. Lipsey v. State, 170 Ga. App. 770 (3) (318 SE2d 184) (1984). It would seem to be the better rule that when confidential communications and disclosures of one’s innermost secrets, thoughts, fears, frustrations, and emotions are entrusted to another person, the latter becomes a type of fiduciary and should not divulge this information or use it to harm or injure the former. Where one is encouraged to bare his soul to a counselor, therapist, psychologist, or psychiatrist, it would seem that the communications should remain confidential, unless perhaps information is revealed that a crime is about to be committed. This should include attorneys and “counselors at law,” medical counselors, theological counselors, and teachers1 and other related counselors, whether licensed or unlicensed, dealing with confidential communications. “Counseling began as a subdiscipline in psychology, but it soon became a field in its own right. Psychoanalysis and dynamic psychotherapy also developed new modifications — family therapy, group therapy, and marital therapy.”2 “By statute, privileged status has been extended to communications within professional relationships with people called ‘psychiatrists,’ ‘psychologists,’ and in some cases, ‘counselors.’ ” (Emphasis supplied.)3
Decided September 3, 1986.
Helen H. Porter, for appellant.
Darrell E. Wilson, District Attorney, C. Stephen Cox, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Lipsey, at p. 772, held in part: “While it is arguable that disclosures made in confidence to mental health professionals other than psychiatrists and psychologists ought to be privileged, the Legislature has not seen to make them so. . . .” (Emphasis supplied.) Therefore, this appears to be a question which the General Assembly would possibly be required to address in the future.

 Parental consent is required in certain areas of psychological testing where children are concerned. Southern Bell Tel. &c. Co. v. Sharara, 167 Ga. App. 665, 669 (307 SE2d 129) (1983).

 J. Robitscher, “The Growth of Psychiatric Authority,” The Powers of Psychiatry, p. 94.

 “The Psychotherapist-Client Testimonial Privilege: Defining the Professional Involved,” 1, 34 Emory L. J. 777, 826 (1985).