Abstract

The authors discuss current public policy concerning the treatment of potentially violent psychiatric patients and outline some legal and ethical precedents of the current policy. Therapeutic interventions before and after the Tarasoff decision are compared. The authors make specific recommendations for clinicians, who they believe tend to interpret laws too restrictively. They suggest that courts need to rethink current liability standards so that legal decisions can be more clinically informed. Finally, they believe that legislative interventions which specify that warning the potential victim and notifying the police absolve psychotherapists from liability may lead to reflexive rather than reflective management of violent patients.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.