The duty to warn: A reconsideration and critique

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 417-424

  Herbert, Paul B ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFIDENTIALITY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL LIABILITY; NEGLIGENCE; PSYCHOTHERAPY; REVIEW; VIOLENCE;

EID: 0036942027     PISSN: 10936793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Herbert PB, Young KA: Tarasoffat twenty-five. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 30:275-81, 2002
2. Tarasoff v. The Regents of the University of California, 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. 1976)
3. Walcott DM, Cerundolo P, Beck JC: Current analysis of the Tarasoff duty: an evolution towards the limitation of the duty to protect. Behav Sci Law 19:325-43, 2001
4. McNiel DE, Binder RL, Fulton FM: Management of threats of violence under California's duty-to-protect statute. Am J Psychiatry 155:1097-1101, 1998
5. Lake PF: Revisiting Tarasoff. Albany Law Rev 58:97-173, 1994
6. Winslade WJ, Ross JW: The Insanity Plea. New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1983, p 53
7. Merton V: Confidentiality and the "dangerous" patient: implications of Tarasoff for psychiatrists and lawyers. Emory Law J 31: 263-342, 1982
8. Tarasoff v. The Regents of the University of California, 529 P.2d 553 (Cal. 1974), vacated by 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. 1976)
9. Tarasoff v. The Regents of the University of California, 108 Cal. Rptr. 878 (Cal. Ct. App. 1973) (reversed)
10. Hicks v. U.S., 511 F.2d 407 (D.C. Cir. 1975), and Homere v. State, 361 N.Y.S.2d 820 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974), aff' d, 370 N.Y.S.2d 246 (1975) (both predating Tarasoff)
11. Restatement (Second) of Torts, §§ 314, 315(a) (1965)
12. Stone AA: The Tarasoff decisions: suing psychotherapists to safeguard society. Harv Law Rev 90:358-78, 1976
13. Note, Professional obligation and the duty to rescue: when must a psychiatrist protect his patient's intended victim? Yale Law J 91: 1430-45, 1982, p 1432 (see Flanders v. Cooper, 706 A.2d 589, 592 (Me. 1998), distinguishing Tarasoff)
14. People v. Poddar, 518 P.2d 342 (Cal. 1974)
15. Perlin ML: Tarasoff at the millennium: new directions, new defendants, new dangers, new dilemmas. Psychiatr Times 16:20-21, 1999
16. Harris GC: The dangerous patient exception to the psychotherapist-patient privilege: the Tarasoff duty and the Jaffee footnote. Wash Law Rev 74:33-68, 1999
17. Monahan J, Steadman HJ, Silver E, et al: Rethinking Risk Assessment: The MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001, pp 142-3
18. Note, Where the public peril begins: a survey of psychotherapists to determine the effects of Tarasoff. Stanford Law Rev 31:165-90, 1978; contrast Gilvelber DJ, Bowers WJ, Blitch CL: Tarasoff, myth and reality: an empirical study of private law in action. Wisconsin Law Rev 1984:443-97, 1984
19. Note, Where the public peril begins: a survey of psychotherapists to determine the effects of Tarasoff. Stanford Law Rev 31:165-90, 1978; contrast Gilvelber DJ, Bowers WJ, Blitch CL: Tarasoff, myth and reality: an empirical study of private law in action. Wisconsin Law Rev 1984:443-97, 1984
20. Gutheil TG: Moral justification for Tarasoff-type warnings and breach of confidentiality: a clinician's perspective. Behav Sci Law 19:345-53, 2001
21. Max DT: The cop and the therapist. The New York Times Magazine. December 3, 2000, pp 94-9
22. Beck JC: Dangerous severe personality disorder law and other developments. AAPL Newsletter. April 2001, p 12
23. Tex. Health & Safety Code § 611.004(a)(2), applied in Thapar v. Zezulka, 994 S.W.2d 635 (Tex. 1999)
24. Or. Rev. Stat. § 179.505, applied in State v. Miller, 709 P.2d 225 (Or. 1985)
25. Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. ch. 740, § 110/11 (viii)
26. N. Y. Mental Hygiene Law § 33.13.6
27. The Principles of Medical Ethics, With Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2001, § 4(8), p 8