How have courts dealt with fears of a mental patient who was allegedly raped by a hospital attendant?

People v. St. Andrew dealt with the fears of a mental patient who was allegedly raped. The observation of the court as to the impact of a special relationship upon a victim's subjective sense of fear or being threatened is particularly applicable to the parent-child, adult-child relationship:

"Within the confines of a mental ward, unreasonable fear on the part of patients is likely to be the norm, and their attendants are presumably aware of that general state of affairs. If a hospital attendant takes advantage of his relationship with a female mental patient to have sexual intercourse with her under circumstances in which he knows that she views his conduct as implying threat of great and immediate bodily harm accompanied by apparent power of execution, and she submits without resistance on that account, he is guilty of the crime of rape even though her view of his conduct may be 'unreasonable' in terms of general standards. Of course, his knowledge [153 Cal.App.3d 811] may be inferred from all the circumstances of the case." (People v. St. Andrew, supra, 101 Cal.App.3d at p. 466, 161 Cal.Rptr. 634, italics added.)