Does Tarasoff apply in all states?
Although some provider types (e.g., psychologists and psychiatrists) are covered by Tarasoff-related duties in most states (Table 2), other provider types (e.g., nonpsychiatrist physicians) are covered in only a subset of states.
Is Texas A Tarasoff state?
Contrary to the 1976 California Supreme Court decision in the renowned Tarasoff case, the Texas Supreme Court rendered a 1999 opinion (Thapar v. Zezulka) that mental health providers in Texas do not have a duty to warn and protect their clients’ known and intended victims.
Does Tarasoff apply in Florida?
Florida provides a duty to warn on a “permissive” basis. In Florida’s iteration of the Tarasoff duty, the psychiatrist “may” disclose confidential patient communications to warn a potential victim and “must” disclose patient communications to communicate the threat to law enforcement. The statute, Fla. Stat.
Is Massachusetts a Tarasoff state?
Generally, absent written patient consent or an appropriate court order or subpoena, Massachusetts health providers are not explicitly permitted to divulge medical information to the police or other law enforcement agencies. Under the Massachusetts statutory version of the Tarasoff rule, Mass.
Is GA a duty to warn state?
Although Georgia case law has established a legal precedent for a duty to protect, there is no statutory duty to warn, nor is there any statutory immunity for a psychologist making such a warning to a third party.
Is California a duty to protect state?
In 2013, legislation went into effect clarifying that the Tarasoff duty in California is now unambiguously solely a duty to protect. Warning the potential victim and the police is not a requirement, but a clinician can obtain immunity from liability by using this safe harbor.
What is the Tarasoff act?
In 1985, the California legislature codified the Tarasoff rule: California law now provides that a psychotherapist has a duty to protect or warn a third party only if the therapist actually believed or predicted that the patient posed a serious risk of inflicting serious bodily injury upon a reasonably identifiable …
Is duty to warn a federal law?
One exception springs from an effort to protect potential victims from a patient’s violent behavior. California courts imposed a legal duty on psychotherapists to warn third parties of patients’ threats to their safety in 1976 in Tarasoff v. The Regents of the University of California.
What is the tarasoff act?
Does North Carolina have a duty to warn law?
Is there a mandated “duty to warn/protect” law for clinical mental health professionals in North Carolina? No. North Carolina does not have a mandated duty to warn/protect law; however, there is no law prohibiting a professional from doing so.
Is Missouri a duty to warn state?
“When a psychologist or other health care professional knows or pursuant to the standards of his profession should have known that a patient presents a serious danger of future violence to a readily identifiable victim the psychologist has a duty under Missouri common law to warn the intended victim or communicate the …
Is Arizona a duty to warn state?
All Phoenix South Community Mental Health Center (186 Ariz. 97 1995) and its reference to Hamman. Licensed Counselors and Licensed Associate Counselors. No – Duty to Warn/Protect; Confidentiality Enforced.
What are the intricacies of Tarasoff?
The intricacies of Tarasoff involve so many variables, from state to state, scenario to scenario, case to case. How does one practice good clinical judgment? The article presents a consideration and discussion with two personal stories in which the so-called Tarasoff Rule, or the “duty to warn” a threatened third party, was invoked.
What is the Tarasoff decision?
The first Tarasoff decision in 1974 created a duty to warn in California and was based on the special relationship between therapist and patient.1 This first decision was unprecedented, and quite upsetting, to therapists due to its legal compromise of patient confidentiality.
What does Tarasoff say about saying all the right things?
He learned “to say all the right things,” such that the forensic specialist assigned to his case agreed with the judge in the case that there were no longer grounds to hold him against his will. I, and others who had worked closely with him, did not agree, and so the Tarasoff rule was invoked.