Appeals court rules parent's mental health records off limits in child custody case

May 28—A Lackawanna County judge erred when she ordered a mother to turn over her mental health treatment records in connection with a custody battle with her child's father, the state Superior Court ruled.

In a precedent-setting ruling, the court said Judge Julia Munley's order violated the woman's privacy rights under the Mental Health Procedures Act, which bars release of confidential records without the patient's consent.

The case centered on whether a Guardian Ad Litem — an attorney appointed to represent the child and ensure their best interests are protected in disputed custody cases — could review the records to help determine if the mother was a fit parent.

The mother's attorney, Robert Buttner of Scranton, said the ruling is an important victory for people who seek mental health services. Had the court upheld the order, it would have a "chilling effect" on a parent's willingness to seek treatment.

"There is a stigma attached to seeking mental health treatment," Buttner said. "This protects people who seek treatment from the fear they might end up some day litigating a custody case where their confidential statements might be used against them."

According to the Superior Court's written opinion: The father filed an emergency petition for custody in August 2019, alleging the mother displayed erratic behavior. The mother filed a counter petition that alleged the father was mentally ill. The parents are identified only by their initials to ensure confidentiality of the proceedings.

Munley appointed Scranton attorney Andrew Phillips as the GAL and directed the mother release three years' worth of counseling records to him. The court's ruling does not indicate if the father also sought mental health treatment and, if so, if Munley ordered those records released. The release of the mother's records was stayed pending the outcome of her appeal.

The Superior Court noted Munley expressed concerns about a conflict between the mental health act, which protects patients' privacy, and the Child Custody Act, which ensures a child's safety.

In her ruling, the court said Munley noted the mother had a 10-year history of mental health treatment and had once overdosed on prescription medication — information that would be pertinent to ensuring the child's best interests are served.

"The Child Custody Act provides that the GAL shall 'be given access to relevant court records, reports of examination of the parents or other custodian of the child and medical, psychological and school records,'" Munley said. "Without a clear picture, the GAL would be engaging in guesswork as to any services this family may need and what real safety concerns there are in this family for (the) child."

In reversing the order, the Superior Court acknowledged a parent's mental health is relevant to determining their fitness to parent. It said there are less intrusive means to obtain that information, such as ordering the parent to undergo a psychological examination.

"Given our prior decisions emphasizing the importance of confidentiality in mental health treatment and the trial court's authority to obtain the same information through a ... mental examination, it is clear that these 'reports of examination' are not meant to include a parent's confidential mental health records," the court said.

The ruling is significant because it was heard by the full nine judge panel of the court, which means it is binding on other courts unless it is later overturned on appeal to the state Supreme Court. It's not known if the father will seek to appeal. Attempts to reach his attorney, Corinne Thiel of Moosic, were unsuccessful.

Contact the writer: tbesecker@timesshamrock.com; 570-348-9137; @tmbeseckerTT on Twitter.