privilege)). However, the legislature may create exceptions to statutory privileges. Martin v. Reinstein, 195 Ariz. 293, 320, ¶ 96, 987 P.2d 779, 806 (App.1999) (stating that statutory privileges, such as the physician-patient pr t use the term “privileged” with respect to educational records. The statutes do not create an independent privilege for educational records. See also State v. Birdsall, 116 Ariz. 196, 198-99, 568 P.2d 1094, 1096-97 (App.1977) (concluding that FERPA and the predecessor statute to A.R.S. § 15-141 permitted disclosure of school'records pursuant to a subpoena duces tecum or other judicial order). Other jurisdictions have reached the same conclusion. See Rios v. Read, 73 F.R.D. 589, 598 (E.D.N.Y.1977) (“It is obvious ... that [FERPA] 517-19 (R.I.2006) (<HOLDING>). At most, the federal and state statutes make
holding that statute making child welfare agency records confidential but disclosable pursuant to a court order did not create an absolute privilege for such records recognizing privilege holding that there is no statutory deliberative process privilege in arizona and declining to create such a privilege under the common law holding that educational records are not privileged under ferpa holding that ferpa and state law did not create an educational records privilege