Cited by

Maricopa Cnty., (citations omitted).

at 286, ¶ 7 (“[T]he behavioral health professional-client privilege prohibits testimony that falls ‘within the scope of the privilege.’”) (-36 (1986)).

Like the psychologist-patient privilege, the behavioral health professional-client privilege prohibits testimony that falls “within the scope of the privilege.” (noting that A.R.S.

See Bain v. Superior Court (Mills)

(stating a defendant waives the psychologist-patient privilege when they either (1) offer themselves as a 2 While not applicable to this post-decree proceeding, unless the defendant waives the privilege by asserting an insanity defense, Arizona’s rules and statutes governing mental health examinatio

condition at issue as a claim or an affirmative defense.” Blazek, 177 Ariz. at 541; (recognizing that the scope of an implied waiver of the physician-patient privilege only extends to privileged communications concerning a specific condition that has been voluntarily placed at issue by the privilege holder).

§ 12-2236; Bain v. Superior Court (Mills), (noting that “statutes relating to the psychologist-patient privilege and the attorney-client privilege are unique by containing express provisions specifying the conduct which will be deemed a waiver of the privilege”).

The scope of the wavier “only extends to privileged communications concerning the specific condition which has been voluntarily placed at issue by the privilege holder.”

At common law, the privilege was impliedly waived when a litigant’s “course of conduct [was] inconsistent with the observance of the privilege.” Bain v. Superior Court in & for Maricopa Cnty.

e shall not voluntarily or involuntarily divulge information that is received by reason of the confidential nature of the” counseling relationship “[u]nless a client waives this privilege in writing or in court testimony.” This privilege “prohibit[s] not only testimonial disclosures in court but also pretrial discovery of information within the scope of the privilege.” (discussing scope of psychologist-patient privilege, which, like behavioral health professional-patient privilege is equivalent

A psychologist’s confidential communications with her patient are privileged and “are placed on the same basis as [those] provided by law between attorney and client.” , (citing Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 32-2085).

our supreme court explained that when a patient "places a particular medical condition at issue by means of a claim or affirmative defense then the privilege will be deemed waived with respect to that particular medical condition."

This common law doctrine of implied waiver holds that an evidentiary privilege is waived by any “course of conduct inconsistent with observance of the privilege.”

See, , (stating the psychologist/client privilege may be waived when the patient pursues a course of conduct inconsistent with the privilege).

§ 12-2235 (2003) (physician-patient privilege), in negligence action against doctor); , (denying motion to compel discovery of records from sessions with psychologist pursuant to A.R.S.

Because Barbara’s claim was a separate claim belonging to her, -36 , -29 (1986), the trial court should have provided a separate verdict form on it.

(trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that authorizing release of one’s medical records to department of public safety was not sufficient to waive privilege in criminal proceeding); , (”[W]aiver of the physician-patient privilege is two-fold: where a privilege holder (1) offers himself as a witness and voluntarily testifies with reference to privileged communications concerning the condition, ...

(implied waiver occurs when “a privilege holder (1) offers himself as a witness and voluntarily testifies with reference to privileged communications concerning the condition, ...

(where supreme court acknowledged Throop and reversed trial court’s finding in medical malpractice action that plaintiff had impliedly waived psychologist-patient privilege).

The purpose behind these privileges is “to enhance the effective diagnoses and treatment of illness by insuring that a person requiring professional attention will not be deterred by fear that his physical or mental condition may become public, thereby subjecting him to embarrassment or humiliation.” , 334 n. 1, , 827 n. 1 (1986).

334 n. 1, , 827 n. 1 (1986).

The Arizona Supreme Court has pointed out that “the purposes behind the physician-patient privilege and the psychologist-patient privilege are identical____” , 334 n. 1, , 827 n. 1 (1986).