and has provided comprehensive rules prohibiting disclosure except under very limited circumstances. See generally Iowa Code ch. 228 (providing rules of limited disclosure for a patient’s mental health records). These rules, however, do not specifically address the disclosure of mental health information in a criminal proceeding, but the right to privacy derived from our constitution remains a forceful protection against disclosure. I recognize the privilege expressed in section 622.10 does not expressly apply to discovery disputes. Yet, the purpose and rationale of the statute unmistakably applies to pretrial discovery in a criminal case with the same vigor and importance as to the testimonial stage of trial. See Newman v. Blom, 249 Iowa 836, 844, 89 N.W.2d 349, 354-55 (1958) (<HOLDING>). Discovery of witness records is a predicate
holding records did not qualify as exempt confidential commercial information under exemption 4 because the information was not actually confidential recognizing federal privilege for confidential therapistpatient communications based in part on the fact that the relationship is protected in all 50 states and the district of columbia recognizing medical records contain the same protected confidential information as a physicians direct testimony about the communications recognizing privacy interest in medical records requested under freedom of information act recognizing qualified privilege for confidential presidential communications