Confidentiality And Informed Consent: Case Study
Tarasoff; Confidentiality and Informed Consent
PSY/305
Abstract
This paper describes the events that took place concerning Prosenjit Poddar and Tatiana Tarasoff, as well as the ruling in the case of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the University of California. The ruling was not a favorable one at first, leaving psychologists feeling this would breach their patients trust. Confidentiality is crucial in a therapist-client relationship. “Legislators reacted to therapists’ concerns regarding the conflict of duties and enacted exceptions to confidentiality statuses when warning was necessary to protect third parties” (“Confidentiality after Tarasoff,” 1994, para. 9).
Tarasoff; Confidentiality and Informed Consent
Confidentiality and informed consent are a crucial factor in the field of psychology. Clients expect that they will be able to speak freely, without the fear of being judged, or their information being breached. In 1969, on behalf of the Tarasoff case, the California Supreme Court ruled that therapists be required to protect third parties from harm. Before consenting to treatment, clients are aware of this requirement. They then are allowed to accept or refuse treatment, however, consent is not valid unless it is volunteered. …show more content…
Why was this not a regulation from the beginning? There are many instances when therapists are considered mandated reporters, meaning that they are required to report any type of abuse or neglect, specifically related to children. Does it not make sense to also be required to report any indications, even if they are threats, of harm towards human beings? The Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the University of California case made that possible, requiring psychologists to take every measure possible in assuring that no harm comes to any third
PSY/305
Abstract
This paper describes the events that took place concerning Prosenjit Poddar and Tatiana Tarasoff, as well as the ruling in the case of Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the University of California. The ruling was not a favorable one at first, leaving psychologists feeling this would breach their patients trust. Confidentiality is crucial in a therapist-client relationship. “Legislators reacted to therapists’ concerns regarding the conflict of duties and enacted exceptions to confidentiality statuses when warning was necessary to protect third parties” (“Confidentiality after Tarasoff,” 1994, para. 9).
Tarasoff; Confidentiality and Informed Consent
Confidentiality and informed consent are a crucial factor in the field of psychology. Clients expect that they will be able to speak freely, without the fear of being judged, or their information being breached. In 1969, on behalf of the Tarasoff case, the California Supreme Court ruled that therapists be required to protect third parties from harm. Before consenting to treatment, clients are aware of this requirement. They then are allowed to accept or refuse treatment, however, consent is not valid unless it is volunteered. …show more content…
Why was this not a regulation from the beginning? There are many instances when therapists are considered mandated reporters, meaning that they are required to report any type of abuse or neglect, specifically related to children. Does it not make sense to also be required to report any indications, even if they are threats, of harm towards human beings? The Tarasoff v. Board of Regents of the University of California case made that possible, requiring psychologists to take every measure possible in assuring that no harm comes to any third