Literature DB >> 9384976

Twenty years after Tarasoff: reviewing the duty to protect.

S A Anfang1, P S Appelbaum.   

Abstract

Since the Tarasoff decision by the California Supreme Court in 1974, mental health clinicians have struggled to balance their duty of confidentiality to their patients against the duty to protect third parties from potential violence. This article explores the development of this issue over the last 20 years, with a focus on ways that Tarasoff has and has not affected clinical practice. Reviewing the evolution of case and statutory law, we discuss appropriate clinical responses for the mental health practitioner who faces a potential "duty to protect" situation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Legal Approach; Mental Health Therapies; Professional Patient Relationship; Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9384976     DOI: 10.3109/10673229609030526

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Harv Rev Psychiatry        ISSN: 1067-3229            Impact factor:   3.732


  2 in total

1.  Disclosure of past crimes: an analysis of mental health professionals' attitudes towards breaching confidentiality.

Authors:  Tenzin Wangmo; Violet Handtke; Bernice Simone Elger
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2014-07-02       Impact factor: 1.352

2.  A 20-year follow-up survey of police officers' experience with Tarasoff warnings: How law enforcement reacts to clinicians' duty to protect.

Authors:  Jeffrey Guina; Bradleigh Dornfeld; Debra A Pinals
Journal:  Behav Sci Law       Date:  2022-02-22
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.