Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title II Chapter 233
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B (2026)

Privileged communications; patients and psychotherapists; exceptions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 20B. The following words as used in this section shall have the following meanings:—

''Patient'', a person who, during the course of diagnosis or treatment, communicates with a psychotherapist;

''Psychotherapist'', a person licensed to practice medicine, who devotes a substantial portion of his time to the practice of psychiatry. ''Psychotherapist'' shall also include a person who is licensed as a psychologist by the board of registration of psychologists; a graduate of, or student enrolled in, a doctoral degree program in psychology at a recognized educational institution as that term is defined in section 118, who is working under the supervision of a licensed psychologist; or a person who is a registered nurse licensed by the board of registration in nursing whose certificate of registration has been endorsed authorizing the practice of professional nursing in an expanded role as a psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist, pursuant to the provisions of section eighty B of chapter one hundred and twelve.

''Communications'' includes conversations, correspondence, actions and occurrences relating to diagnosis or treatment before, during or after institutionalization, regardless of the patient's awareness of such conversations, correspondence, actions and occurrences, and any records, memoranda or notes of the foregoing.

Except as hereinafter provided, in any court proceeding and in any proceeding preliminary thereto and in legislative and administrative proceedings, a patient shall have the privilege of refusing to disclose, and of preventing a witness from disclosing, any communication, wherever made, between said patient and a psychotherapist relative to the diagnosis or treatment of the patient's mental or emotional condition. This privilege shall apply to patients engaged with a psychotherapist in marital therapy, family therapy, or consultation in contemplation of such therapy.

If a patient is incompetent to exercise or waive such privilege, a guardian shall be appointed to act in his behalf under this section. A previously appointed guardian shall be authorized to so act.

Upon the exercise of the privilege granted by this section, the judge or presiding officer shall instruct the jury that no adverse inference may be drawn therefrom.

The privilege granted hereunder shall not apply to any of the following communications:—

(a) If a psychotherapist, in the course of his diagnosis or treatment of the patient, determines that the patient is in need of treatment in a hospital for mental or emotional illness or that there is a threat of imminently dangerous activity by the patient against himself or another person, and on the basis of such determination discloses such communication either for the purpose of placing or retaining the patient in such hospital, provided however that the provisions of this section shall continue in effect after the patient is in said hospital, or placing the patient under arrest or under the supervision of law enforcement authorities.

(b) If a judge finds that the patient, after having been informed that the communications would not be privileged, has made communications to a psychotherapist in the course of a psychiatric examination ordered by the court, provided that such communications shall be admissible only on issues involving the patient's mental or emotional condition but not as a confession or admission of guilt.

(c) In any proceeding, except one involving child custody, adoption or adoption consent, in which the patient introduces his mental or emotional condition as an element of his claim or defense, and the judge or presiding officer finds that it is more important to the interests of justice that the communication be disclosed than that the relationship between patient and psychotherapist be protected.

(d) In any proceeding after the death of a patient in which his mental or emotional condition is introduced by any party claiming or defending through or as a beneficiary of the patient as an element of the claim or defense, and the judge or presiding officer finds that it is more important to the interests of justice that the communication be disclosed than that the relationship between patient and psychotherapist be protected.

(e) In any case involving child custody, adoption or the dispensing with the need for consent to adoption in which, upon a hearing in chambers, the judge, in the exercise of his discretion, determines that the psychotherapist has evidence bearing significantly on the patient's ability to provide suitable care or custody, and that it is more important to the welfare of the child that the communication be disclosed than that the relationship between patient and psychotherapist be protected; provided, however, that in such cases of adoption or the dispensing with the need for consent to adoption, a judge shall determine that the patient has been informed that such communication would not be privileged.

(f) In any proceeding brought by the patient against the psychotherapist, and in any malpractice, criminal or license revocation proceeding, in which disclosure is necessary or relevant to the claim or defense of the psychotherapist.

The provision of information acquired by a psychotherapist relative to the diagnosis or treatment of a patient's emotional condition, to any insurance company, nonprofit hospital service corporation, medical service corporation, or health maintenance organization, or to a board established pursuant to section twelve of chapter one hundred and seventy-six B, pertaining to the administration or provision of benefits, including utilization review or peer review, for expenses arising from the out-patient diagnosis or treatment, or both, of mental or nervous conditions, shall not constitute a waiver or breach of any right to which said patient is otherwise entitled under this section and section thirty-six B of chapter one hundred and twenty-three.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 186 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 459 Mass. 603 (Mass. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 459 Mass. 603 (Mass. 2011). · cites it 9× “34 As pertinent here, prior to his classification hearing, Doe filed a motion to exclude “mental health records” generated during his stay at the treatment center, claiming, among other things, that they were privileged under G. L. c. 233, § 20B (psychotherapist-patient…”
Commonwealth v. Seabrooks, 743 N.E.2d 831 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 10× “12) and Federal (Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution) constitutional rights *448 against self-incrimination, and was contrary to the statutory protection of the psychotherapist-patient privilege, G. L. c. 233, § 20B. 8 The testimony should not have been admitted,…”
Commonwealth v. Oliveira, 780 N.E.2d 453 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 11× “As to the records from Corrigan Mental Health Center, the judge determined that they were protected by either the psychotherapist-patient privilege (G. L. c. 233, § 20B) or the social worker-client privilege (G.”
Adoption of Saul, 804 N.E.2d 359 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 13× “In this appeal by the biological parents from a decree dispensing with their consent to the adoption of their child, the mother claims that psychiatric records admitted in evidence containing references to diagnoses of her mental illness are subject to the…”
Commonwealth v. Callahan, 799 N.E.2d 113 (Mass. 2003). · cites it 7× “At issue here are privileges protected by G. L. c. 233, § 20B (testimonial privilege for communications between “patient and a psychotherapist relative to the [patient’s] diagnosis or treatment’’), and G.”
Martin v. Commonwealth, 884 N.E.2d 442 (Mass. 2008). · cites it 8× “112, § 135A, and G. L. c. 233, § 20B, the judge concluded that, although relevant to the defense, the records were not subject to Commonwealth v.”
Bd. of Reg. in Med. v. Doe, 933 N.E.2d 67 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 9× “A judge in the Superior Court ruled that the records were not protected by the psychotherapist-patient privilege, see G. L. c. 233, § 20B 3 (the statute), and ordered Doe to produce them.”
Commonwealth v. Waweru, 102 N.E.3d 391 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 12× “The defendant argues that his statements to McGovern were protected by the patient-psychotherapist **182 privilege set forth in G. L. c. 233, § 20B. The statute provides: "[I]n any court proceeding .”
Commonwealth v. Brandwein, 760 N.E.2d 724 (Mass. 2002). · cites it 6× “He contends that Lindbeck’s revelations to Officer Hebert (concerning both the gun and the bank robbery) were prohibited by G. L. c. 233, § 20B, as the circumstances surrounding those disclosures did not meet the requirements of the dangerous patient exception set forth in § 20B…”
Commonwealth v. Collett, 439 N.E.2d 1223 (Mass. 1982). · cites it 6× “[3] Other statutory privileges are: psychotherapist-patient, G.L.c. 233, § 20B; priest-penitent, G.L.c.”
In re Laura L., 768 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 12× “Dube gave her the required Lamb warning, which included notice of her privilege under G. L. c. 233, § 20B. See note 3, supra. In so doing, however, Dr.”
Petitions of the Dep't of Soc. Servs. to Dispense With Consent to Adoption, 503 N.E.2d 1275 (Mass. 1987). · cites it 5× “G. L. c. 233, § 20B (1984 ed. & Supp., Dec.”
Show all 186 citing cases →
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(6) — 1 case
Walden Behavioral Care v. K. I., 2014 Mass. App. Div. 1 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2014).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(a) — 6 cases
Adoption of Saul, 804 N.E.2d 359 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “In this appeal by the biological parents from a decree dispensing with their consent to the adoption of their child, the mother claims that psychiatric records admitted in evidence containing references to diagnoses of her mental illness are subject to the…”
In re Laura L., 768 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). “Dube gave her the required Lamb warning, which included notice of her privilege under G. L. c. 233, § 20B. See note 3, supra. In so doing, however, Dr.”
Conklin v. Feitelberg, 146 F. Supp. 3d 430 (D. Mass. 2015).
Donovan v. Prussman, 12 Mass. L. Rptr. 65 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2000).
Jme v. Drt, 6 Mass. L. Rptr. 183 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1996).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(b) — 4 cases
In re Laura L., 768 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). “Dube gave her the required Lamb warning, which included notice of her privilege under G. L. c. 233, § 20B. See note 3, supra. In so doing, however, Dr.”
Commonwealth v. Buck, 835 N.E.2d 623 (Mass. App. Ct. 2005).
Misitano v. Ghaffar, 1 Mass. L. Rptr. 405 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1993).
Commonwealth v. York, 15 Mass. L. Rptr. 68 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2002).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(c) — 18 cases
Donovan v. Prussman, 12 Mass. L. Rptr. 65 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2000).
Conklin v. Feitelberg, 146 F. Supp. 3d 430 (D. Mass. 2015).
Linscott v. Burns, 18 Mass. L. Rptr. 685 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2005).
Commonwealth v. Clemons, 427 N.E.2d 761 (Mass. App. Ct. 1981).
Robart v. Alamo Rent-a-Car, LLC, 19 Mass. L. Rptr. 154 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2005).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(e) — 7 cases
Care & Prot. of Bruce, 694 N.E.2d 27 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998).
Adoption of Seth, 560 N.E.2d 708 (Mass. App. Ct. 1990).
In re Laura L., 768 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002). “Dube gave her the required Lamb warning, which included notice of her privilege under G. L. c. 233, § 20B. See note 3, supra. In so doing, however, Dr.”
Adoption of Adam, 500 N.E.2d 816 (Mass. App. Ct. 1986).
In re the Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 429 N.E.2d 1023 (Mass. App. Ct. 1982).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(fc) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Kendall, 399 N.E.2d 1115 (Mass. App. Ct. 1980).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 233, § 20B(o) — 1 case
Walden Behavioral Care v. K. I., 2014 Mass. App. Div. 1 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2014).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.