One may argue that Clark’s opinion regarding the opinion in Tarasoff v. Regents is reflective of a utilitarianism, whereby he argues that a duty requiring a breach of confidentiality with regards to the treatment of a patient of a mentally ill patient may reduce the effectiveness of the treatment, thus imposing greater suffering to the patient. Moreover, consider Mill’s interpretation utilitarianism establishes the role of the government, stating that if the government or other institution were to have the ability to interfere, a fear is introduced in patients, such that they must question when and how the government may choose to act in response to their situation. Clark expresses similar sentiments when justifying the support of the legislation
