Cited. 169 Conn. 223. Psychiatrist-patient privilege not waived and testimony of psychiatrist hired by state, but not as a result of court order, held inadmissible. 178 Conn. 626. Cited. 190 Conn. 813; 191 Conn. 453; 192 Conn. 166; 197 C. 326; 199 Conn. 693. Before privilege is applied, court should conduct voir dire for purpose of determining existence of impeaching evidence in order to protect constitutional right of confrontation. 201 Conn. 211. Cited. Id., 244; 205 C. 386; 211 Conn. 555; 212 Conn. 50; 217 Conn. 243; 218 Conn. 85; 221 C. 447; 223 Conn. 450; 225 C. 450; Id., 700; 228 Conn. 1; 230 C. 43; 235 Conn. 185; Id., 595; 236 C. 514; Id., 625; 238 Conn. 313; 242 C. 666. Statute reflects public policy against suit by patient’s former spouse. 250 CA 86. Legislative intent was not to give courts discretion to override privileged communication. 254 C. 321. Broad sweep of statute covers not only disclosure to defendant or his counsel, but also disclosure to a court even for the limited purpose of an in camera examination; section does not impose an obligation on the holder of privilege to state expressly to whom the records cannot be disclosed, rather, statute indicates that the holder of privilege must state in writing to whom the documents may be disclosed and for what purpose; there is no authority to support the proposition that defendant has a right, even when the complaining witness’ credibility is central to the case, to have her confidential records produced directly to him. 289 C. 411. Medical and dental records created by an inpatient mental health facility during the treatment of a patient are exempt from disclosure under section. 318 Conn. 769. A trial court, in certain circumstances, may beconstitutionally required to review in camera privileged psychiatric records of a homicide victim to determine whether information contained therein supports accused’s claim of self-defense, provided the accused first demonstrates a compelling need for the privileged records, predicated on the relevance of the records to the self-defense claim, the potential significance of the records in establishing that defense, and the unavailability of alternative sources of information. 326 C. 742. Psychiatric patient privilege and defendant’s right to confrontation discussed. 1 Conn.App. 384. Cited. 8 CA 216; 10 CA 103. Psychiatrist-patient privilege cannot be overridden by provisions of Sec. 19a-14(a)(10). 14 Conn.App. 552. Cited. 15 CA 222; 17 CA 174; 18 Conn.App. 273; 19 Conn.App. 304; 20 CA 101; 24 Conn.App. 287; 25 Conn.App. 653; judgment reversed, see 223 Conn. 52; 30 Conn.App. 839; 33 Conn.App. 253; Id., 647; 35 Conn.App. 94; judgment reversed, see 235 Conn. 185. Need for information to institute claim creates compelling countervailing interest that requires disclosure of limited information. 50 CA 694. Cited. 52 CA 408.