Search

Psychotherapists' and physicians' sexual contact with their patients has been long held as unethical conduct. However, lawyers' sexual contact with clients has been largely ignored in the professional literature. This article uniquely anatomizes the similarities in the vulnerabilities and power imbalances that exist between psychotherapists' and lawyers' relationships with patients/clients. These characteristics enable the professional to exert undue influence over the less-powerful party, and for these reasons lawyers should be held to fiduciary standards in their personal dealings with clients. The authors propose a rebuttable presumption that sexual contact between an attorney and client was obtained through the attorney's exercise of undue influence and was therefore a breach of the attorney's fiduciary duties to the client.

Although there is unanimity among mental health professionals as to the unethical aspect of psychotherapist-patient sexual contact, there is disagreement as to whether subsequent treating psychotherapists should be required to report the abuse of a former therapist to a licensing agency. Such reporting may have negative effects upon the patient and upon the patient's relationship with the therapist. It may also, however, prevent further exploitation by the original abusing therapist. Three states have adopted reporting statutes designed to protect patients from this type of abuse. The current statutory enactments of California, Wisconsin, and Minnesota are compared in terms of their differing approaches to the problem.