Connecticut Statutes
§ 52-146c — Privileged communications between psychologist and patient.
Connecticut § 52-146c
This text of Connecticut § 52-146c (Privileged communications between psychologist and patient.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-146c (2026).
Text
(a)As used in this section:
(1)“Person” means an individual who consults a psychologist for purposes of diagnosis or treatment;
(2)“Psychologist” means an individual licensed to practice psychology pursuant to chapter 383;
(3)“Communications” means all oral and written communications and records thereof relating to the diagnosis and treatment of a person between such person and a psychologist or between a member of such person's family and a psychologist;
(4)“Consent” means consent given in writing by the person or his authorized representative;
(5)“Authorized representative” means (A) an individual empowered by a person to assert the confidentiality of communications which are privileged under this section, or (B) if a person is deceased, his personal representative or next of kin,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Safeco Insurance v. Vecsey
259 F.R.D. 23 (D. Connecticut, 2009)
Doe v. Meachum
126 F.R.D. 444 (D. Connecticut, 1989)
In Re Tabatha B., (Sep. 15, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 12529 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Hunnicutt v. Armstrong
305 F. Supp. 2d 175 (D. Connecticut, 2004)
Legislative History
(1969, P.A. 597, S. 13; P.A. 82-160, S. 63; P.A. 89-154, S. 1; P.A. 92-225, S. 3, 5.) History: P.A. 82-160 rephrased the section and inserted Subsec. indicators; P.A. 89-154 amended Subsec. (a) to redefine “person” and to add the definitions of “psychologist”, “communications”, “consent”, and “authorized representative”, amended Subsec. (b) to rephrase its provisions, to extend the prohibition on disclosure to “juvenile, probate, commitment and arbitration proceedings”, and to add provisions re the manner and effect of a withdrawal of consent, and amended Subsec. (c) to replace the introductory provision that “Relevant communications under this section shall not be privileged” with “Consent of the person shall not be required for the disclosure of such person's communications”, deleting reference to a “clinical” psychologist in Subsec. (c)(1) and adding Subsecs. (c)(3) to (5), inclusive, re exceptions when there is risk of imminent injury to person or property, when abuse is known or suspected, and when claim is made for collection of fees for services rendered; P.A. 92-225 added Subsec. (c)(6) re exception when communications are disclosed under limited circumstances to the immediate family or legal representative of certain homicide victims. Cited. 191 C. 453; 203 C. 641. Erroneous denial of psychiatrist-patient privilege does not infringe upon right of any person other than the one to whom the privilege is given. 208 C. 683. Cited. 211 C. 555. Cited. 18 CA 273; 23 CA 98; Id., 330; 24 CA 287. Court did not violate statute by ordering disclosure of substance abuse and psychiatric treatment records of parents in case involving termination of their parental rights. 48 CA 563.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 52-109
Substituted plaintiff.Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 52-146c, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/52-146c.