Tarasoff Case Summary

The Tarasoff Case Study When an individual suffering from a mental illness threatens to harm another, who should be extended the right of protection: the one making the threat or the potential victim? To answer this question, it is essential to understand the Tarasoff Case, the arguments for both the rights of the mentally ill as well as the potential victim, and how various religions view this ethical question. In August 1969, Prosenjit Poddar sought mental health treatment at Cowell Memorial Hospital. During one of Poddar’s therapy sessions with Dr. Lawrence Moore, he confided his intent to kill Tatiana Tarasoff. Dr. Moore enlisted the services of campus police and asked them to assist him in apprehending Poddar for commitment (Beauchamp & Childress, 2001, pp. 415-416). Campus police interviewed Poddar and subsequently released him because he presented himself as a lucid individual. Meanwhile, Dr. Harvey Powelson, Dr. Moore’s supervisor, concluded no further action needed to be taken, including warning the victim (p. 415). In October 1969, Poddar murdered Tarasoff. Consequently, Tarasoff’s parents filed a lawsuit entitled, “Failure to Warn of a Dangerous Patient” (p. 416). As a result, this …show more content…
Psychotherapists argue that privacy and confidentiality are vital for the successful treatment of the mentally ill (p. 417). Therefore, without the guarantee that psychiatrists will protect the privacy of the mentally ill patient, the patient is not likely to seek treatment, fearing the stigma involved (p. 417), nor are they likely to completely divulge information necessary to properly be diagnosed (p. 418). If the mentally ill do not feel they have a safe environment where they can seek help, they will undoubtedly avoid treatment all together, which could result in increased violence and unnecessary commitment (p.