Loading...
Ahmed v. Stefaniu : Is the sky really falling?
Morris, John J.
Morris, John J.
Author(s)
Contributor(s)
Collections
Files
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Online Access
Abstract
More than three decades ago in the case of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California2 the Supreme Court of California found a psychologist, Dr. Moore, liable for the death of Tatiana Tarasoff. She was murdered by one of his patients. The patient had confided to Dr. Moore an intent to kill Ms. Tarasoff. He requested that the campus police detain the patient. However, they released him a short time later as he seemed rational. No one warned the woman or her family. When, several months later, the patient killed Ms. Tarasoff, her parents sued Dr. Moore and other employees of the university. Dr. Moore argued that by reason of patient confidentiality he had no duty to warn Ms. Tarasoff or her family. The court rejected that defence: The confidential character of patient psychotherapist communications must yield to the extent that disclosure is essential to avert danger to others. The protective privilege ends where the public peril begins.
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Article
Date
2007-11
Identifier
ISBN
DOI
Copyright/License
With permission of the license/copyright holder