The Tarasoff decision, by imposing on psychiatrists an obligation to
warn the intended victim of threats made by a patient, but only under
certain vaguely specified circumstances, may stampede psychiatrists into
issuing such warnings to avoid possible legal liability no matter how
remote the risk of harm may actually be. The authors suggest that the ill
effects of such a reaction by psychiatrists--breach of confidentiality and
the attendant erosion of trust and harm to the therapeutic alliance--can
often be easily avoided by taking less drastic steps, some of which are
illustrated by case presentations.
Abstract Teaser