Psychiatrists and the Media

  • Irwin N. Perr
Part of the Critical Issues in American Psychiatry and the Law book series (CIAP, volume 5)


Dealing with the media is one of the more ticklish, sensitive activities of the psychiatrist who, as a result, may be put into a difficult position in which conflicting interests are many. On the one hand is the dominating professional ethic of the right to privacy and confidentiality; a right that has both ethical and legal roots. Many states have adopted privilege statutes that protect privacy of communication, in recognition of the demand made by the medical profession for such protection not only for their patients but also for their professional practices. On the other hand, a number of motivations for recourse to the media exist. Some of these are external to the psychiatrist, whereas some are internal.


Pathological Gambling Acquire Immune Deficiency Syndrome Medical Examiner Criminal Case British Medical Association 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Perr IN : Psychiatry, the law, and the media—the Son of Sam debacle. Leg Aspects Med Pract 1977; 5:23–25, November, psychiatric ed.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Noguchi TT: Conflicts and challenges for the medical examiner. J Forensic Sci 1987; 32:829–835.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Perr IN: The Hinckley case, the media, and the insanity defense. J Forensic Sci 1983; 28:815–822.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Perr IN: The insanity defense: A tale of two cities. Am J Psychiatry 1983; 140:873–874.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moran R: Knowing Right from Wrong: The Insanity Defense of Daniel McNaughtan. New York, The Free Press, 1981, p 20.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ormond R: The McNaughton case and its predecessors, in West DJ, Walk A: His Trial and Aftermath. Ashford, Kent, England, Gaskell Books, 1977, p 8.Google Scholar
  7. See Ormond, note 6 above, p 9; and Moran, note 5 above, p 19.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glueck S: Law and Psychiatry: Cold War or Entente Cordiale? Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
  9. Perr IN: Hinckley verdict proves the system works. New York Times, July 1, 1982.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robitscher JD: Public life and private information. JAMA 1967; 202:96–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Perr IN: Privilege, confidentiality, and patient privacy: Status 1980.J. Forensic Sci 1981; 26:109–115Google Scholar
  12. American Psychiatric Association: The Principles of Medical Ethics. Google Scholar
  13. British Medical Association: The Handbook of Medical Ethics. London, 1980, pp 45–46.Google Scholar
  14. See British Medical Association, note 13 above, p 73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irwin N. Perr
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry, Robert Wood Johnson Medical SchoolUniversity of Medicine and Dentistry of New JerseyPiscatawayUSA
  2. 2.Rutgers Law School—NewarkNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations