August 20, 1992



Ms. Patricia S. Tweedy, M.P.A.

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

9101 Burnet Road, Suite 212

Austin, Texas 78758 

 

Letter Opinion No. 92-39



Re:    Whether privileged information

relevant to the parent-child relationship

that a psychologist gained during a

voluntary psychological evaluation

of a person involved in, or associated

with, court proceedings involving the

parent-child relationship are excepted

from disclosure under Texas Rule of

Civil Evidence 510(d)(6)    (RQ-349) 

 



Dear Ms. Tweedy:



	You have requested an opinion concerning rule 510(d)(6)

of the Texas Rules of Civil Evidence.  To place your

question in context, you state that the Texas State Board of

Examiners of Psychologists has pending before it a complaint

involving a professional's alleged disclosure of privileged

mental health information in a court proceeding involving

"the parent-child relationship."  The complainant, a non- 

party to the judicial proceedings but the step-mother of the

children in question, voluntarily submitted to a

psychological evaluation for purposes related to a child

custody dispute.  Pursuant to a court order, the evaluating

psychologist subsequently submitted to the court a written

report on her evaluation of the complainant.  The

complainant alleges that the evaluating psychologist, who is

licensed as a psychologist in the State of Texas pursuant to

V.T.C.S. article 4512c, disclosed privileged information in

the proceedings without her consent.  See TEX. R. CIV. EVID.

509(e).



	Rule 510 pertains to the confidentiality of

communication between a patient [footnote 1]  and a

professional [footnote 2]  such as a medical physician.  The

general rule of privilege articulated in rule 510 states

that communication between a patient and a professional is

confidential as between the two parties and may not be

disclosed to any third persons other than those present to  

further the interest of the patient in the diagnosis,

examination, or treatment of the patient.  Id. 510(a)(4),

(b)(1).  Records pertaining to the "identity, diagnosis,

evaluation, or treatment of a patient" are confidential.

Id. 510(b)(2).  Section 510(d) lists several exceptions to

the general rule of privilege.  You ask specifically about

the exception provided in rule 510(d)(6):



Exceptions to the privilege in court

proceedings exist when the disclosure is

relevant in any suit affecting the parent- 

child relationship.



The Rules of Civil Evidence provide that the court shall

determine the admissibility of evidence.  See id. 104; see

also id. 103.  This office will not issue an opinion that is

in effect an appeal of a judicial decision.  Attorney

General Opinions JM-287 (1984); H-905 (1976); O-1874 (1940).

Accordingly, we cannot answer your question.





S  U  M  M  A  R  Y



	Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Evidence

510(d)(6), a licensed psychologist may

disclose privileged information if the

information is relevant in any suit affecting

the parent-child relationship.  The Opinion

Committee will not issue an opinion that

effectively overrules a judicial decision.



						Yours very truly,







						Kymberly K. Oltrogge

						Assistant Attorney General

						Opinion Committee

 

------------------------------------------------------------ 

FOOTNOTES



	[1] Rule 510(a)(2) defines "patient" as  any person who 

(A) consults, or is interviewed by, a professional for 

purposes of  diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of any 

mental or emotional condition or  disorder, including 

alcoholism and drug addiction; or (B) is being treated  

voluntarily or being examined for admission to voluntary 

treatment for drug  abuse.



	[2] Rule 510(a)(1) defines "professional" as  any 

person (A) authorized to practice medicine in any state or 

nation; or (B)  licensed or certified by the State of Texas 

in the diagnosis, evaluation or treatment  of any mental or 

emotional disorder; or (C) involved in the treatment or  

examination of drug abusers; or (D) reasonably believed by 

the patient to be  included in any of the preceding 

categories.