We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Michele Meier and Julie Wall-MacDonald for their assistance in data collection and interpretation.

Ninety-one Canadian therapists (49 women and 42 men, mean age 41 years) working primarily with sex offenders were surveyed to determine the presence of vicarious trauma, identify mitigating variables if present and assess its relationship to burnout. Participants completed a 24-item demographic questionnaire, the Traumatic Stress Institute Belief Scale -Revision L, the Impact of Event Scale, and the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Contrary to expectations, participants did not exhibit significantly higher degrees of vicarious traumatization than a criterion reference group of mental health professionals. Participants who reported having a venue to address the personal impact of their work were found to be more likely to score lower on the measure of vicarious trauma than those who did not. Other variables theorized to be related to vicarious trauma were not found to be related to scores on the measure assessing vicarious trauma. Twenty four percent of the sample was found to have a moderate to severe stress response to their work with offenders. Twenty three percent of the sample scored in the high range on the Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization subscales, hallmarks of professional burnout. High correlations among measures of vicarious trauma and burnout were also found, calling attention to the need to further differentiate the two constructs. Implications regarding the measurement of vicarious trauma and the appropriateness of generalizing the phenomenon to sex offender treatment providers are discussed.

The psychological functioning and abuse history of 23 sexual, 51 violent, and 79 property adolescent offenders were compared. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory scores of these three groups did not differ although sexual offenders were twice as likely to have a history of sexual abuse, making those personal experiences more relevant to the form of their criminal behavior.

No abstract

The precedent-setting 1976 judicial decision of Tarasoffv. Regents of the University of California established a duty to protect whereby psychotherapists are expected to exercise reasonable care to protect the potential victims of their clients' violent behavior. However, no standard of care for dangerous clients has been established. In this article, the authors present a model for clinical decision making to determine the best interventions for dealing with dangerous outpatient clients. The model takes into account the degree of violence risk and the strength of the therapeutic alliance. Four cases are presented to illustrate the application of the model.Outpatient psychotherapy with a dangerous client poses a conflict for therapists between therapeutic, ethical, and legal duties to the client and a legal duty to protect any potential victims of the client's violent behavior. If a threat of violence is made known to others, either for the purpose of warning a potential victim or alerting law enforcement officials to prevent the violent act, it violates the client's confidence and could result in the client feeling intense embarrassment or anger; being charged, arrested, and possibly convicted of a criminal offense; or being denied or refusing further treatment. The therapist could also face disciplinary'or civil charges for breaching confidentiality. If, on the other hand, the threat is kept confidential, any subsequent violence might have been prevented and the therapist may feel guilt, anxiety, lowered confidence, and a reluctance to treat similar clients; also, the therapist may face a lawsuit.Before the 1976 California Supreme Court decision of Tarasoffv. Regents of the University of California, psychotherapists tended not to be concerned about legal liability for their clients* behavior outside the therapy. The Tarasoffcomt ruled, however, DEREK TRUSCOTT received his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Windsor in 1989. He is currently a psychological consultant with the Workers' Compensation Board of Alberta,