25-year-old Reema (name changed) walked into what she believed would be a routine marriage counselling session, hoping perhaps for mediation, closure, or clarity amid an increasingly bitter separation. Instead, she says, the session turned into something far more unsettling. Her estranged husband repeatedly pushed the counsellor to "diagnose" her with ADHD and bipolar disorder, insisting that her alleged mental health issues had existed long before their marriage. The conversation, she recalls, soon stopped feeling like therapy and began resembling an attempt to build a legal case against her. The counsellor eventually intervened, asking the husband to stop what Reema describes as a sustained effort to create a psychiatric narrative that could strengthen his position in the divorce proceedings.
Rohit (name changed), 30, recounts a similarly disturbing experience. Over the course of his marriage, he says, his wife, a psychologist by profession, repeatedly told him he suffered from ADHD and several other mental health conditions.
She also allegedly prescribed him psychedelic drugs over an extended period, despite not being legally authorised to do so. After Rohit survived a suicide attempt, he claims his wife arrived at the hospital seeking his signature on an affidavit that sought to absolve her of any responsibility for his actions, while also asking him to declare that he wrote his will naming her as heir to his property without any coercion by her.
It was only after the couple separated and lawyers became involved that Rohit realised psychologists cannot legally prescribe such medication in India; only psychiatrists can. By then, however, he says his wife had already accumulated videos, records and documentation portraying him as someone with severe psychiatric illness.
These are not merely isolated stories of marital breakdown. They reveal a darker and increasingly contentious reality of modern divorce battles, where a spouse's mental health history is viewed as a lawyer's most lethal weapon and a doctor's fiercely guarded medical secret.
Twisha Sharma's death and the subsequent claims by her mother-in-law about her mental health spotlight how the stigma surrounding mental illness can be weaponised against those who seek help.
Also read: Pregnancy To Fights, How Bhopal Cops Could Grill Twisha Sharma's Husband
Mental Illness And Marriage Law
Dr Shaurya Garg, MD, a psychiatrist associated with AIIMS Delhi, while speaking with NDTV, said that psychiatrists often encounter situations where family members seek psychiatric documentation in the context of matrimonial or family disputes.
"Sometimes relatives come with a fixed expectation and request that some diagnosis be written, even when the clinical assessment does not support it. A psychiatrist cannot write a symptom, diagnosis, or prescription merely because a family member wants it for social or legal use. Any psychiatric diagnosis must be based on clinical history, mental status examination, relevant collateral information where appropriate, records if available, and accepted diagnostic standards."
He added that this is exactly where ethical and medico-legal safeguards become important.
"A medical record or prescription cannot be used as a social or legal weapon. If a clinical assessment does not support a diagnosis, that must be documented honestly. Equally, if a mental disorder is present, that too must be documented clinically and not sensationalised."
Supreme Court Advocate Aditya Giri explained that a marriage can be simply annulled if it is proven that the spouse was diagnosed with serious mental health issues before the marriage and it was not disclosed.
To avoid lengthy divorce battles, people often resort to such tactics to get an annulment on grounds of insanity.
"I have come across several cases where clients, before even initiating formal divorce proceedings, start creating or collecting such records against their spouse. With so much information available online and on social media, especially by content creators who make generic content, people have started documenting and collecting such material even without their lawyer's advice or spouse's consent. The latest platform giving advice is ChatGPT. One client I came across started recording such evidence one year before filing for divorce without understanding the nuances of such claims," advocate Giri explained.
Dr Garg explained that matrimonial law does not treat a psychiatric label casually. Under laws such as the Hindu Marriage Act and Special Marriage Act, mental disorder becomes legally relevant only in specific statutory contexts, such as capacity to consent at the time of marriage or mental disorder of such kind and extent as described under the law. The Hindu Marriage Act also separately refers to mental disorder in the context of divorce, where the illness is of such a kind and extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.
"The question is not simply whether someone has a diagnosis. The question is whether a specific legal threshold is met. That is decided by the court. The psychiatrist provides the clinical opinion," Dr Garg added.
Also read: The Story Of Twisha Sharma: A Grand Wedding, Slow Isolation, Then Death
What Are The Safeguards For Such Records?
Advocate Giri, while explaining the legal process in marital discord cases, explained that at the preliminary stage, the aggrieved spouse may present to the court whatever evidence they might have to prove the grounds of mental illness; however, having a medical assessment by a government institution like AIIMS is preferred to corroborate the claims.
Dr Garg said that psychiatric information is among the most sensitive forms of health information and is protected by confidentiality principles.
"Under the Mental Healthcare Act, a person has a right to confidentiality regarding their mental health, mental healthcare, treatment and physical healthcare. Such information cannot be casually shared with relatives, employers, media, or others merely because they ask for it," he added.
He explained that information may be shared only in legally recognised situations, such as with the patient's consent, with treating professionals for care, with the nominated representative only to the extent required under law, where necessary to prevent serious harm or threat to life, or when ordered by a competent statutory or judicial authority. MHCA also specifically restricts the release of photographs or identifying information about a person undergoing treatment at a mental health establishment to the media without consent.
"At the hospital level, detailed clinical records such as history, examination findings, diagnosis or provisional diagnosis, treatment plan, and follow-up notes are maintained as medical records. These are not available to relatives merely because they are relatives. If the patient has decision-making capacity, the patient decides who may receive information, subject to legal exceptions," he said.
Dr Garg clarified that patients themselves have a right to access their basic medical records, while clinicians may withhold specific parts only in narrowly defined situations where disclosure may cause serious mental harm to the person or harm to others.
Also read: "Don't Know Whom To Trust": Twisha Sharma's Brother As 2nd Post-Mortem Looms
What Happens In Medico-Legal Cases
Dr Garg explained that for court-referred assessments, the psychiatrist's role is not to take sides in a matrimonial dispute.
"The role is to answer specific clinical questions asked by the court, within the limits of psychiatric expertise. Depending on the referral, this may include current mental state, diagnosis, treatment history, severity, functional impairment, capacity relevant to a specific decision, and whether available clinical evidence supports the alleged timing or course of symptoms," he added.
Dr Garg said that collateral information may be taken from family members or other sources where clinically or legally appropriate, but it must be documented source-wise and interpreted carefully.
"A psychiatrist is not a judge of the matrimonial dispute. The psychiatrist gives a clinical opinion. The legal conclusion belongs to the court." Dr Garg clarified.
Need For Preserving Confidentiality
Lawyers often ask their clients seeking divorce to disclose every little detail that can help the case, whereas doctors insist that using mental health details just to create a narrative against an aggrieved spouse causes severe damage not only to the individual but also to the cause of mental health at large.
Dr Garg said that public speculation about anyone's alleged mental illness is damaging.
"No person's mental health should become a casual topic of national debate. This deepens stigma, discourages people from seeking help, and turns psychiatric language into a tool of public shaming. Media reporting should protect privacy, avoid diagnosis by rumour, and distinguish between verified medical evidence and speculation," he added.
