Laznovsky v. Laznovsky (2000) & Mental Health in Custody Cases

Normally, when someone reaches out to psychiatrist, counselor, or other mental health professional, the communication between patient and professional is protected, which means that it isn’t typically discoverable in court. This “psychotherapist-patient” privilege is parallel to the privilege accorded to communication between a husband and wife. However, under certain circumstances, psychotherapist-patient information may be discoverable. The discoverability of psychotherapist-patient communication remains a controversial and hotly debated issue in many jurisdictions throughout the country.

In the case of Laznovsky v. Laznovsky (2000), this issue came to the foreground when a mother sought sole legal custody of two children, and the father sought to block this attempt. Let’s explore this important case and its issues in detail.

Summary of the Case

The mother and father in this case married in 1985 and separated permanently in 1995. During their decade long relationship, the couple temporarily separated (and then reconciled) several times. The mother worked as a paralegal and the father worked as an attorney. The couple had two children. The mother had a history of seeking professional help for mental health issues; the couple had also seen a psychotherapist jointly on several occasions. When the couple permanently separated in 1995, the mother sought sole legal custody. This maneuver by the mother was a surprise to the father, because the couple had previously reached an agreement whereby the mother would have primary physical custody but shared legal custody. The father filed for sole legal custody in response to the mother’s surprise maneuver.

As part of the father’s effort to prevent sole custody for the mother, and gain sole custody for himself, the father attempted to obtain the mother’s mental health records in discovery. Subsequently, the discoverability of the mother’s mental health records became a major issue in the custody battle. As mentioned, the discoverability of privileged information between psychotherapists and patients is an important issue in custody cases. In her response to the father’s motion to discover the records, the mother argued that the psychotherapist-patient privilege should remain in place, and that consequently the records should be non-discoverable. Ultimately, the trial court ruled in favor of the mother and granted her sole legal custody. The father appealed.

Outcome & Discussion

On appeal, the appellate court considered a wide range of arguments and perspectives. Again, this issue is something which is still debated throughout the country; the appellate court in Maryland looked at opinions from other states in its decision-making process. In law, courts often look to other states for “persuasive authority” when attempting to settle a complex or controversial issue. At the appellate stage, the mother argued that her right to psychotherapist-patient privilege had not been waived simply because she sought full custody. The father had tried to argue that this right had in fact been waived because her mental state was a critical issue in the custody decision-making process. After reviewing various sources, the Maryland appellate court held that the mother’s right to psychotherapist-patient privilege was not automatically waived by making a motion for sole legal custody. Hence, the father failed in his attempt to discover the records, and in his attempt to compel a new psychological evaluation of the mother.

Reach Out to the Murphy Law Firm Today

If you want to learn more, or if you have a currently unresolved issue, don’t hesitate to reach out to one of the leading attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-5243.