Privilege is an evidential principle which, on the grounds of public policy, excludes evidence relevant and otherwise admissible. This thesis aims to discover whether privilege should be applied to the psychotherapeutic profession in South Africa. At present, the only profession in South Africa afforded privilege is the legal profession. There are two main theoretical justifications for privilege: the utilitarian and the individual/human rights approach. This thesis considers whether the psychotherapeutic profession wan-ants privilege under either theory, and recommends that the law of privilege integrate both theories rather than adopt one or the other. The impact of the Constitution and the right to privacy receive particular attention. Very little literature or case law on the question of psychotherapeutic privilege was found in South Africa. Consequently, extensive comparative research into the common-law systems of England, Canada and United States of America was done. This research yielded some interesting findings. The first is that case-by-case development of the law of privilege is uncel1ain and fragmented. The next is that psychotherapeutic privilege exists in almost absolute form in the United States of America, but is littered with lacunae causing as much uncertainty as the case-by-case approach to privilege law. The most helpful method of dealing with the problem was found in Canada, where a two-stage approach to protecting personal information, including psychotherapeutic records, has been developed. In light of this research, this thesis reassesses the original viability of psychotherapeutic privilege in South Africa. Privilege, it was found, is not the best solution to protecting psychotherapeutic communications. This thesis recommends legislative adoption of an amended two-stage approach based on the Canadian model for sexual offence trials as the best method of protecting psychotherapeutic communications in both civil and criminal proceedings. The thesis ends by suggesting draft legislative provisions.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:rhodes/vital:3717 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Gewald, Rieka Susan |
| Publisher | Rhodes University, Faculty of Law, Law |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Masters, LLM |
| Format | 185 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Gewald, Rieka Susan |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds