California Supreme Court allows therapists to challenge law on child p0rn reporting

[Disir]

Psychotherapists have spent years fighting a 2014 California law requiring them to report patients who confided having looked at child pornography, complaining that it deters people with sexual compulsions from seeking treatment and forces therapists to call the police on patients they do not believe pose a risk.

But they knew they faced a steep hurdle in getting the law overturned, citing what one scholar called “the ick and disgust factor” at the mere thought of the subject.

A sharply divided California Supreme Court grappled with the case Thursday, deciding the state must show the law actually helps children by presenting evidence at a trial.
California Supreme Court allows therapists to challenge law on child porn reporting

The therapist doesn't want to report on who the THERAPIST doesn't believe is a threat..........

 

[Gdjjr]

Most of our *what if* laws are worse case scenario's- unless/until actual harm is committed what's the crime? Thinking, or desiring? Believing a threat- can you say the ME? Yes it's the same thing- using fear to sell something- if child porn is on the internet and being traded back and forth it's just a matter of time before the criminals are caught- producing it causes harm- viewing is a "believed threat"- and, this doesn't address the *planted* crap- yes, the purveyors of fear would stoop so low-

 

[White 6]

Most of our *what if* laws are worse case scenario's- unless/until actual harm is committed what's the crime? Thinking, or desiring? Believing a threat- can you say the ME? Yes it's the same thing- using fear to sell something- if child porn is on the internet and being traded back and forth it's just a matter of time before the criminals are caught- producing it causes harm- viewing is a "believed threat"- and, this doesn't address the *planted* crap- yes, the purveyors of fear would stoop so low-

I saw the post and did not want to make a knee-jerk pronouncement about California, though much that I read about the state sounds pretty iffy. Instead, I tried to research what the law said about it in Tennessee. I did light internet search , nothing. Went to Tennessee State Code Annotated, did the Nexis search, using multiple search arguments, nothing relate to psychiatrists or priests, regarding mandatory reporting for patient confessed child pornography in course of therapy. Looks like not addressed in this state, wavered or not, although there are laws against procession and child labor laws protecting children from adults employing them in that industry. I don't know if that makes us better or worse?

 

[Gdjjr]

I saw the post and did not want to make a knee-jerk pronouncement about California, though much that I read about the state sounds pretty iffy. Instead, I tried to research what the law said about it in Tennessee. I did light internet search , nothing. Went to Tennessee State Code Annotated, did the Nexis search, using multiple search arguments, nothing relate to psychiatrists or priests, regarding mandatory reporting for patient confessed child pornography in course of therapy. Looks like not addressed in this state, wavered or not, although there are laws against procession and child labor laws protecting children from adults employing them in that industry. I don't know if that makes us better or worse?

I wasn't talking about just Ca with "most of our what if laws"- and I wasn't talking about just this argument when I said it's the same thing as the ME crap- selling an issue using fear is selling an issue using fear. If it's bought it will be used again. It's THE why we have so damn many laws. This particular argument in Ca is just one more in a list-
Breaking patient Dr confidentiality is a slippery slope and sets a precedent- we should never ever trust the gov't again, in any respect. It has proven too many times to be untrustworthy- it set a "precedent" years and years ago which people ignore- it's time for people to recognize it for what it is- the exact opposite of its original intent.

 

[White 6]

I saw the post and did not want to make a knee-jerk pronouncement about California, though much that I read about the state sounds pretty iffy. Instead, I tried to research what the law said about it in Tennessee. I did light internet search , nothing. Went to Tennessee State Code Annotated, did the Nexis search, using multiple search arguments, nothing relate to psychiatrists or priests, regarding mandatory reporting for patient confessed child pornography in course of therapy. Looks like not addressed in this state, wavered or not, although there are laws against procession and child labor laws protecting children from adults employing them in that industry. I don't know if that makes us better or worse?

I wasn't talking about just Ca with "most of our what if laws"- and I wasn't talking about just this argument when I said it's the same thing as the ME crap- selling an issue using fear is selling an issue using fear. If it's bought it will be used again. It's THE why we have so damn many laws. This particular argument in Ca is just one more in a list-
Breaking patient Dr confidentiality is a slippery slope and sets a precedent- we should never ever trust the gov't again, in any respect. It has proven too many times to be untrustworthy- it set a "precedent" years and years ago which people ignore- it's time for people to recognize it for what it is- the exact opposite of its original intent.

Point taken, GD. I guess I am ready to make the knee-jerk opinion that Tennessee is better off in this respect than California. I too support Doctor patient confidentiality.

 

[Disir]

I don't think the therapist is really in a position with an hour a week or an hour every other week to determine all the factors regarding safety. Especially considering that person is reliant only on what is being told to them.