There has been many cases that have shape the counseling career through the years, one of them was the Tarasoff case. The Tarasoff case is to date one of the most misunderstood and well-known cases among counselors. More than 40 years ago in 1976, a lawsuit was filed by the parents of Tatiana Tarasoff (Tarasoff vs Regents of the University of California) where the court decided that mental health professionals have a “duty to warn” or “duty to protect” third parties from harm (Damon).
The court came to this conclusion after the murder of Tatiana Tarasoff on October 27, 1969. On this day Prosenjit Poddar went to Tatiana Tarasoff’s home and shot and stabbed her to death. Poddar and Tarasoff met each other at a dance class, they both attended …show more content…
Lawrence Moore and the campus police. The Tarasoffs accused them of negligence stating that the police should have help Poddar for commitment and that Dr. Lawrence Moore should have warned them of his threat to Tarasoff. In the first Tarasoff decision in 1974, a duty was imposed to warn potential third party victims of foreseeable harm. The courts second opinion in 1976 became the “official” decision, Justice Tobriner response to this case was, “When a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, her incurs and obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger”. In other words, mental health professionals now had a “duty to warn”, Tobriner requested more reasonable action taken by the therapist to protect third parties so also making the call “duty to protect” …show more content…
Various writers have defined the term to include psychologist, counselors, social workers psychiatrist, family therapist and mental health counselors (EBSCO). Because school counselors are included in “therapist”, school counselors are expected to follow the “duty to warn” law. The courts consider the school counselors to be members of the mental health profession and expected to used their knowledge and skills and similar circumstances to Tarasoff duty (EBSCO). In counseling there is often an internal debate whether something is legal or ethical. When it comes to the Tarasoff decision it is considered to be both legal and ethics matter. According to ACA Code of Ethics B.1.c “counselors protect the confidentiality information of prospective and current clients. Counselors disclose information only with appropriate consent or with sound legal or ethical justification” (book). This ACA Code of Ethics section B.2.a reflects almost perfectly on the Tarasoff
The court came to this conclusion after the murder of Tatiana Tarasoff on October 27, 1969. On this day Prosenjit Poddar went to Tatiana Tarasoff’s home and shot and stabbed her to death. Poddar and Tarasoff met each other at a dance class, they both attended …show more content…
Lawrence Moore and the campus police. The Tarasoffs accused them of negligence stating that the police should have help Poddar for commitment and that Dr. Lawrence Moore should have warned them of his threat to Tarasoff. In the first Tarasoff decision in 1974, a duty was imposed to warn potential third party victims of foreseeable harm. The courts second opinion in 1976 became the “official” decision, Justice Tobriner response to this case was, “When a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, her incurs and obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger”. In other words, mental health professionals now had a “duty to warn”, Tobriner requested more reasonable action taken by the therapist to protect third parties so also making the call “duty to protect” …show more content…
Various writers have defined the term to include psychologist, counselors, social workers psychiatrist, family therapist and mental health counselors (EBSCO). Because school counselors are included in “therapist”, school counselors are expected to follow the “duty to warn” law. The courts consider the school counselors to be members of the mental health profession and expected to used their knowledge and skills and similar circumstances to Tarasoff duty (EBSCO). In counseling there is often an internal debate whether something is legal or ethical. When it comes to the Tarasoff decision it is considered to be both legal and ethics matter. According to ACA Code of Ethics B.1.c “counselors protect the confidentiality information of prospective and current clients. Counselors disclose information only with appropriate consent or with sound legal or ethical justification” (book). This ACA Code of Ethics section B.2.a reflects almost perfectly on the Tarasoff