Tarasaurus Rex: A Standard of Care That Could Not Adapt.

Abstract

The duty to protect the public inspired by Tarasoff promotes lay action, primarily warning, to protect foreseeable victims of outpatient-generated harm. The nonadaptability of lay protection to professional practice has been highlighted as contemporary research and service delivery center on the management of risk of harm through clinical interventions. The authors attribute the emphasis on lay protection to 2 flaws underlying these legal duties: the framing of foreseeability of harm as prediction rather than as risk and the failure to distinguish responsibilities intrinsic to the clinical professions from those delegated to the clinician. A reformulation of the duty, sensitive to these dimensions, promotes a standard of protection emphasizing clinical interventions without precluding lay protection. The result is a duty of care consistent with research developments in risk and highly adaptable across service delivery, clinical settings, and client populations.

Protecting others from homicide and serious harm.

“…If providing theiapy will result in a client's no longei being a thieat to someone, then theiapists should focus oui efforts on doing so as best we can. If a therapist is unable to facilitate an effective therapeutic process, ot if in his or her best judgment doing so would not significantly reduce the risk of harm, only then should he or she undertake nonprofessional actions that require no special expertise, such as warning the potential victim or alerting the police (Quattrocchi & Schopp, 2005;Truscott & Evans, 2001;Truscott et al, 1999;Truscott, Evans, & Mansell, 1995).…”

Ethical and legal issues in conducting treatment research with potentially violent individuals.

“…Although Tarasoff (1976) has often been misinterpreted as a mandate fot mental health providers to warn potential victims, jurisdictions vary with regard to what actions are required on the part of the clinician. As a result, some courts mandate a duty to warn, whereas other courts adopted the actual intention of the courts in the Tarasoff ruling: a duty to protect through whatever means necessary (Quattrocchi & Schopp, 2005).…”

“…Particularly when research is conducted on an outpatient basis, researchers should have readily available the names and phone numbers of probation or parole officers, police, or other legal system personnel (e.g., the judge or district attorney) to enable rapid communication about potentially violent participants. Because the variations in legal standards and requirements are too numerous to cover here, researchers are advised to familiarize themselves with the relevant statutes in their particular regions (for examples of state judicial rulings, see Quattrocchi &Schopp, 2005, andGalietta, 2004).…”

Ethics and the invisible psychologist.

“…Some legislators and attorneys who represent plaintiffs have proposed that psychotherapists become mandatory reporters to state agencies when clients tell them of sexual intimacies with prior therapists, even over the clients' objections. The post-Tarasoff era has also spawned a spate of so-called progeny cases and legislation related to the duty of the psychotherapist to protect third parties from harm (see, e.g., Eisner, 2006;Quattrocchi & Schopp, 2005;VandeCreek & Knapp, 2001;Yufik, 2005).…”