The Subpoena, the Therapy File, and the Threat

A subpoena duces tecum is a litigation demand, not a judicial determination. It does not by itself authorize disclosure of confidential material, and complying reflexively is a common and serious error.

Your steps

1. Verify the subpoena and the underlying authority; confirm the case and the parties.
2. Notify the privilege holder or the holder's counsel, and assert privilege or seek a protective order if there is any objection.
3. If HIPAA applies, a subpoena is sufficient only with satisfactory assurances that the party has notified the individual and no objection was filed, or with a qualified protective order; otherwise a court order with the required protections is needed (45 C.F.R. 164.512(e)).

What is approachable The evaluation report itself was prepared for the court and is ordinarily disclosed to the parties. Non-privileged administrative material such as appointment letters and billing records is generally producible.

What requires care

• Raw test data may be released to another qualified professional rather than to counsel or the court at large (APA Ethics Code 9.04), and test security obligations under 9.11 and publisher copyright limit broader distribution. Offer to send a release to a psychologist retained by the father or to provide a summary.
• Interview notes and audio are the evaluator's working material; produce them only under order, and seek a protective order limiting use.

The deletion request must be refused. Altering a report to remove unfavorable validity data misleads the court and violates the obligation to be accurate and impartial.

The subpoena conflates two relationships with different privileges and different scope.

The custody evaluation is a court-ordered forensic assessment. Its confidentiality is limited, the parties were presumably notified of that at the outset, and the report goes to the court and the parties. The mother's participation there does not waive privilege over everything she has ever told a psychologist.

The therapy began after the evaluation closed and rests on a different, more protective relationship. The privilege belongs to the patient, not to the attorney who says release is fine, and not to you. The mother must give informed, written authorization for a specific scope; a general statement that she has put her mental state at issue does not automatically open the entire treatment file. Even in jurisdictions applying a patient-litigant waiver, the waiver is usually limited to records relevant to the condition placed in issue, and courts commonly permit in camera review.

Your actions

• Do not produce the therapy records without an authorization or a court order, and tell both attorneys why.
• Confirm the mother's position directly, in writing, rather than through her attorney's informal assent.
• If compelled, request in camera review and the narrowest possible production, and note that psychotherapy notes receive heightened protection under HIPAA.
• Document the threat of a board complaint; being threatened is not a reason to make an improper disclosure, and a board complaint for complying with the law or for protecting privilege is defensible.

Treat the threat as a separate, urgent clinical and legal question.

The duty depends on jurisdiction. Some states impose a duty to protect an identified third party under Tarasoff-style statutes or case law; others permit disclosure without mandating it; some limit the duty to threats against a specific, identifiable victim, which this is. There is a firearm reference, an identified victim, and a history of conflict in a family you have already assessed, so the threshold for action is met in most jurisdictions.

Steps

• Assess the information you have: the source, the specificity of the threat, access to weapons, and any history of violence. You have only a report from the partner, so corroborate before acting if time permits, but do not delay if the risk is imminent.
• Consider warning the intended victim, notifying law enforcement, and, if a clinical relationship with the father exists, arranging emergency evaluation. If you have no clinical relationship with him, a warning and a police notification are the typical responses.
• Consult your risk manager or an attorney, and document what you learned, what you disclosed, and why.

Interaction with the record dispute Any disclosure must be limited to what the duty requires. The threat information goes to the identified victim and law enforcement, not into a wholesale production to the father's attorney. Keep the two matters separate: the subpoena dispute is about minimizing disclosure, and the threat response is a narrow, justified exception to confidentiality. Confusing them risks either over-disclosure or a failure to act.