A judge has dismissed a lawsuit by three mental health experts who sued to bar prosecutors in Los Angeles County from enforcing a law requiring psychotherapists to reveal if any patients have downloaded or viewed child pornography.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern rejected the experts’ claims that the law would invade the patients’ privacy and will not protect children.
“There is no recognized absolute fundamental privacy right to possess or view child pornography,” Stern wrote in his July 29 ruling. “Contrary to any suggestion by the plaintiffs, the possession of child pornography does not involve a fundamental constitutional or other privacy right.”
Plaintiffs Don L. Mathews and Michael L. Alvarez, both licensed marriage and family therapists, and alcohol and drug counselor William Owen filed the complaint Feb. 20 against District Attorney Jackie Lacey and California Attorney General Kamala Harris.
Lawyers for both Harris and Lacey filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit.
The suit asked that AB 1775, an amendment to the Penal Code, be declared unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs be awarded attorneys’ fees. Alvarez lives in the South Bay, Owen in Los Angeles and Mathews in Walnut Creek.
Before AB 1775, the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act served a legitimate purpose of requiring therapists to report if they knew or suspected that children were being sexually abused or exploited, according to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs contended the new law “dramatically and unconstitutionally expanded the scope of CANRA” by forcing therapists to report patients who view child pornography over the Internet or on their cell phones, without any evidence the person has sexually abused anyone.
The suit alleged the “overbroad nature of AB 1775’s invasion of privacy rights extends to the reporting of minors who view sexually explicit self- portraits sent to them by other minors over phone networks, a practice known as “sexting.”
“As psychotherapists, Mathews and Alvarez have treated numerous patients … many of whom have admitted downloading and viewing child pornography on the Internet, but whom (they) … do not believe present a serious danger of engaging in ‘hands-on’ sexual abuse or exploitation of children or the distribution of child pornography to others,” the suit stated.
The patients usually have no prior criminal history and have never expressed a sexual preference for children, according to the lawsuit.
Mandated reporters such as therapists who do not follow the law can be found guilty of a misdemeanor and face up to six months in prison, a $1,000 fine and the possible suspension or revocation of their licenses.
—City News Service