Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207 (2026)
Communications between psychiatrist and patient
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Communications between a patient and a licensed physician when practicing as a psychiatrist in the course of and in connection with a therapeutic counseling relationship regardless of whether the therapy is individual, joint, or group, are privileged in proceedings before judicial and quasi-judicial tribunals. Neither the psychiatrist nor any member of the staff may testify or be compelled to testify as to such communications or otherwise reveal them in such proceedings without consent of the patient except:
- (1) In proceedings in which the patient raises the issue of the patient's mental or emotional condition;
- (2) In proceedings for which the psychiatrist was ordered by the tribunal to examine the patient if the patient was advised that communications to the psychiatrist would not be privileged, but testimony as to the communications is admissible only on issues involving the patient's mental or emotional condition; and
- (3) In proceedings to involuntarily hospitalize the patient under title 33, chapter 6, part 4 or title 33, chapter 6, part 5, if the psychiatrist decides that the patient is in need of care and treatment in a residential facility. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the exception is limited to disclosures necessary to establish that the patient poses a substantial likelihood of serious harm requiring involuntary hospitalization under title 33, chapter 6, part 4 or title 33, chapter 6, part 5.
- (b) When personally identifiable patient information is to be disclosed in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding or any other public proceeding, the authority conducting the proceeding shall take reasonable steps to prevent unnecessary exposure of such information to the public and to further this section's policy of protecting the right of privacy. Such steps may include screening of questions in prehearing conferences and in camera inspection of papers.
- (c)
- (1) Privileged communications between a patient and a licensed physician when practicing as a psychiatrist in the course of and in connection with a therapeutic counseling relationship, regardless of whether the therapy is individual, joint, or group, may be disclosed without consent of the patient if:
- (A) Such patient has made an actual threat to physically harm an identifiable victim or victims; and
- (B) The treating psychiatrist makes a clinical judgment that the patient has the apparent capability to commit such an act and that it is more likely than not that in the near future the patient will carry out the threat.
- (2) The psychiatrist may disclose patient communications to the extent necessary to warn or protect any potential victim. No civil or criminal action shall be instituted, nor shall liability be imposed due to the disclosure of otherwise confidential communications by a psychiatrist pursuant to this subsection (c).
- (1) Privileged communications between a patient and a licensed physician when practicing as a psychiatrist in the course of and in connection with a therapeutic counseling relationship, regardless of whether the therapy is individual, joint, or group, may be disclosed without consent of the patient if:
Acts 1965, ch. 157, § 1; 1972, ch. 648, § 11; T.C.A., § 24-112; Acts 1986, ch. 776, § 1; 1987, ch. 417, § 1; 1989, ch. 519, § 1; 1994, ch. 832, § 1; 2000, ch. 947, §§ 8A, 8C.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: State v. Dickerson, 885 S.W.2d 90 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993).
State v. Dickerson, 885 S.W.2d 90 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). “Specifically, he argues that the state’s use of these statements violated: (1) the psychiatrist/patient privilege codified in T.C.A. § 24-1-207; and (2) the Tennessee *92 Rules of Criminal Procedure regarding discovery.”
Hannah Ann Culbertson v. Randall Eric Culbertson, 455 S.W.3d 107 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “May 9, 2012); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207 (2000) (related to psychiatrists).”
Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996). “Codified Laws §§ 19-13-6 to 19-13-11 (1995); Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207 (1980); Tex. Rules Civ.”
State v. Baker, 751 S.W.2d 154 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). “T.C.A. § 24-1-207 applies, in pertinent part, to communications between psychiatrist and patient and provides that such communications shall be privileged except in civil and criminal cases and other legal proceedings in which: (1) The mental condition of the patient is an…”
Ex Parte United Serv. Stations, Inc., 628 So. 2d 501 (Ala. 1993). “1991); Tenn.Code Ann. § 24-1-207 (1992 Supp.) (psychiatrist only); Va.”
Kirchner v. Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc., 184 F.R.D. 124 (M.D. Tenn. 1998). “The Court begins its inquiry with Tennessee statutory law on privileges. Plaintiffs psychiatrist-patient communications are privileged except in proceedings in which she raises the issue of her mental or emotional condition.”
State v. Wyrick, 62 S.W.3d 751 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). “§§ 24-1-207 (communications between a patient and psychiatrist in the course of a therapeutic counseling relationship are privileged), 63-11-213 (confidential communications between a client and a psychologist are privileged to the same extent as attorney-client communications),…”
In Re Subpoena Served Upon Jorge S. Zuniga, M.D. In Re Subpoena Served Upon Gary R. Pierce, M.D., 714 F.2d 632 (6th Cir. 1983). “Stat. Ann. § 45:14B-28; N.M.Rules of Ev. 504; N.”
United States v. Mathis, 377 F. Supp. 2d 640 (M.D. Tenn. 2005). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207 . The statute further provides that.”
Wiles v. Wiles, 449 S.E.2d 681 (Ga. 1994). “Code § 34-26-2 (1991) (extending privilege to relations between "licensed psychiatrists" and "clients"); Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207 (Supp. 1994) (protecting communications between a patient and "a licensed physician when practicing as a psychiatrist in the course of and in…”
State v. Vilvarajah, 735 S.W.2d 837 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). “See T.C.A. § 24-1-207. If the appellant invokes this privilege, and does not furnish the State with a report, Dr.”
State v. Woods (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). “Ira Lew, a psychiatrist who treated the victim, on the basis of psychiatrist/patient privilege under T.C.A. § 24-1-207; D. Whether the trial court erred in allowing the State to impeach the credibility of defense witness Josh Woods, the victim’s twin brother; E.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207(a) — 1 case
Richard Darrell Trigg v. Joseph Church (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-207(a)(1) — 2 cases
Sheryl Lynny Hooke (Thompson) v. Alan Richard Thompson (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).
State v. Woods (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010). “Ira Lew, a psychiatrist who treated the victim, on the basis of psychiatrist/patient privilege under T.C.A. § 24-1-207; D. Whether the trial court erred in allowing the State to impeach the credibility of defense witness Josh Woods, the victim’s twin brother; E.”
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.