I don ' t completely agree with that . I went to one myself . If she was a minor . YES ! !. But she is an adult . I would look more into it , though . The are obligated it to tell the authorities only if they believe that you are will harm yourself or others . And at any time if under 18 years old . In case they are called under oath in court to testify . My Fiance has a master dredge int the social work field . I will advise for you to go to a therapist yourself , and talk about the situation . Also , make sure to tell her about your girlfriend not wanting to tell the police about her dad . Ask her if she takes the sessions would she need to report her ? I am not an expert in this nor a professional . I am taking based on my own experience which is different from the person to person . This is why I strongly suggest that he go himself to a therapist and ask this question . Do not take a decision before hand or you might regret it . We are not qualified in here to tell you what to . This decision could be the difference from life and death . I would take it very seriously . I think that ' s the best way to go to ensure her wellbeing . This my help . Psychotherapy is , for the most part , confidential . Patients of mental health providers like psychiatrists , psychologists , and social workers reasonably expect that their intherapy disclosures will remain private . If they didn ' t or couldn ' tif they anticipated that their therapists might divulge their innermost secretstherapy would be wildly ineffective . So say the federal government and states , as they have enacted statutes or their courts have issued rulings preventing certain mental health professionals from disclosing information communicated in the course of the treatment relationship . Not all jurisdictions , however , acknowledge the psychotherapistpatient privilege in criminal proceedingstake Texas , which strips the privilege from criminal cases unless the treatment in question is voluntary and relates to drug or alcohol abuse . Tex . R . Evid . 509 . And in many places where the privilege applies to criminal cases , the scope of and exceptions to confidentiality vary . The following is , therefore , a general discussion of the psychotherapistpatient privilege and some of its features and exceptions , not an exhaustive description of the law throughout the country . Who ' s IncludedThe law of your jurisdiction either the state or federal government will define the exact professionals who are bound by the psychotherapistpatient privilege . Typical statutes provide that the privilege applies to communications with licensed psychiatrists psychologists social workers , and counselors . It may also extend to others who provide therapy , such as unlicensed mental health counselors who are supervised by licensed psychologists . State v . Farthing , 146 Ohio App . 3 d 720 2001 . Privileged RelationshipThe psychotherapistpatient privilege covers statements by patients to their treatment providers during therapy . It doesn ' t apply to conversations outside the therapy contextfor example , a discussion between a therapist and patient who are waiting in line at the grocery store . It also doesn ' t apply if the recipient of the information happens to be a psychotherapist but doesn ' t treat the speaker . As an example , the privilege may not apply to courtordered mental examinations to determine sanity or competency . Psychological treatment and testing after litigation has begun are beyond the scope of this article . Privileged MaterialWhen the psychotherapistpatient privilege does apply , it covers patients ' statements , and often therapists ' diagnoses and notes . It includes recitations of fact , and expressions of emotion and opinionjust about anything the patient says . It can even include admissions of criminal liability In several jurisdictions , a therapist cannot report someone who confesses to a crime . United States v . Romo , 413 F . 3 d 1044 9 th Cir . 2005 , United States v . Landor , 699 F . Supp . 2 d 913 E . D . Ky . 2009 . However , there are scenarios in which mental health professionals either can or must report criminal behavior . And the rules regarding admissions of guilt can vary from one state to another . For example , in some states , a homicide confession during therapy is considered unprivileged . Exceptions to the PrivilegeWaiverA patient can vitiate the psychotherapy privilege simply by waiving it . A patient might waive confidentiality , for example , by agreeing to disclosure of her mental health records in a lawsuit for emotional distress . Crimefraud exceptionAn exception to the psychotherapistpatient relationship in some states involves the patient seeking or obtaining the therapist ' s services in order to commit a crime or form of fraud . So , for instance , deceitful statements by a patient to a psychiatrist intended to persuade the latter to prescribe inappropriate controlled substances wouldn ' t be privileged . That isn ' t to say , however , that all statements by that patient over the span of therapy would be admissible in courtonly those related to the crime . Stidham v . Clark , 74 S . W . 3 d 719 Ky . 2002 . Dangerous patient exceptionRelated AdsMost states have an exception to the psychotherapistpatient privilege for dangerous patients , often referred to as the Tarasoff duty . Tarasoff v . Regents of Univ . of Cal . , 17 Cal . 3 d 425 1976 . Depending on the jurisdiction , the exception either allows or requires therapists to report statements by patients that indicate dangerousness . In California , for example , therapists must disclose statements when the patient presents a risk of serious harm to others , and disclosure is necessary to prevent that harm . The therapist ' s required course of action depends on the circumstances and can involve notifying the potential victim , the police , or both . United States v . Chase , 340 F . 3 d 978 9 th Cir . 2003 . For instance , if a patient tells her psychiatrist that she plans on shooting her exboyfriend , the psychiatrist may have to notify the police and warn the former beau . If the patient is sufficiently mentally ill , the therapist may be required to initiate involuntary commitment proceedings . In some instances , once the duty to warn has arisen and the therapist has divulged the patient ' s statements , those statements may be used at trial . However , several courts have held that the duty to warn is distinct from the admissibility of the patient ' s statements in courtin other words , a therapist must still warn of a dangerous patient , but may not testify about the statements necessitating the warning . United States v . Ghane , 673 F . 3 d 771 , 786 8 th Cir . 2012 . Origin of the Duty to Protect Tarasoff v . RegentsOn October 27 , 1969 , Prosenjit Poddar , a graduate student at U . C . Berkeley , killed fellow student and romantic interest Tatiana Tarasoff . Tatiana ' s parents subsequently sued the Regents of the University of California , among others , for failing to adequately protect their daughter . They alleged that two months before the murder , Poddar was participating in voluntary psychotherapy at UCB ' s hospital . He told his therapist that he planned on killing an unspecified young woman who could have easily been identified as Tatiana . At the request of the hospital ' s psychiatric staff , police officers took Poddar into custody for hospitalization . The plaintiffs claimed that satisfied by his promise to stay away from Tatiana , the police officers released Poddar rather than committing him . The director of the psychiatry department ordered destruction of records relating to Poddar , and that he not be involuntarily committed . No one notified Tatiana ' s parents of their daughter ' s potential danger . Poddar subsequently began to share an apartment with Tatiana ' s brother near her residence . Shortly after she returned from an overseas trip , he went to her home and killed her . In the first ruling of its kind , the California Supreme Court held that a psychotherapist who determines or should determine that a patient poses a serious danger to another must use reasonable care to protect the potential victim . Tarasoff v . Regents of Univ . of California , 17 Cal . 3 d 425 1976 . Several other states adopted the Tarasoff rule , and the California legislature wrote it into law in 1985 . Child abuses exceptionMany states have statutes requiring healthcare providers , including mental health professionals , to report any suspected abuse of children , elders , and dependent adults . So , in most cases , therapists who hear admissions of such abuse from patients not only can report their patients ' statements , they must . If for example , a man confesses to his therapist that he recently beat his stepdaughter , the psychotherapistpatient privilege as to that confession folds . The therapist must report the admission to the authorities , and the patient ' s incriminating statements may be admissible in court . Hayes v . State , 667 N . E . 2 d 222 Ind . Ct . App . 1996 . Consult a ProfessionalThis article doesn ' t cover all potential exceptions to the psychotherapistpatient privilege , nor the differences regarding the privilege from one jurisdiction to another . If you are concerned about the potential for disclosure of statements you have made or are considering making during therapy , consult an experienced attorney . Only such an attorney can properly advise you as to the applicability of the psychotherapistpatient privilege in your precise situation . Further , you should ask your therapist for an explanation of the confidentiality rules that doand do notapply to your treatment relationship .