Add to ORKGDespite the almost universal familiarity of mental health professionals with the Tarasoff case, many questions regarding its associated legal requirements often arise when evaluating potentially dangerous patients. The principles of the duty to warn/protect, while appearing nebulous at times, contain key concepts that the clinician must consider in the face of potential danger to third parties. This article reviews the land-mark decision of the Tarasoff case and outlines its key concepts. In addition, given that state jurisdictions vary in treatment of Tarasoff-like cases, this article explores the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
Professional counselors, spurred by the courts, have a dual ethical and legal responsibility to prot...
Despite the almost universal familiarity of mental health professionals with the Tarasoff case, many...
Offers a brief history of duty-to-protect statutes, which limit the liability of psychotherapists wh...
In most jurisdictions, the Tarasoff duty is defined as a duty on the part of mental health professio...
A previous article in this Journal1 surveyed a psycho-therapist’s legal duty to warn third parties o...
In most jurisdictions, the Tarasoff duty is defined as a duty on the part of mental health professio...
The duty of psychotherapists to warn threatened third persons of serious danger from their patients ...
A counselor’s duty to warn and protect third parties of threats made by their clients has been a com...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
Professional counselors, spurred by the courts, have a dual ethical and legal responsibility to prot...
Despite the almost universal familiarity of mental health professionals with the Tarasoff case, many...
Offers a brief history of duty-to-protect statutes, which limit the liability of psychotherapists wh...
In most jurisdictions, the Tarasoff duty is defined as a duty on the part of mental health professio...
A previous article in this Journal1 surveyed a psycho-therapist’s legal duty to warn third parties o...
In most jurisdictions, the Tarasoff duty is defined as a duty on the part of mental health professio...
The duty of psychotherapists to warn threatened third persons of serious danger from their patients ...
A counselor’s duty to warn and protect third parties of threats made by their clients has been a com...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
Recent events have revived questions about the circumstances that ought to trigger therapists' duty ...
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
The seminal ruling of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the Universities of California enacted a duty ...
Professional counselors, spurred by the courts, have a dual ethical and legal responsibility to prot...