The psychotherapist as witness for the prosecution: the criminalization of Tarasoff
Abstract
The "duty to protect" doctrine heralded by the Tarasoff decision seeks to prevent physical harm to third parties by psychiatric patients. Recent court cases have mandated the testimony of a criminal defendant's psychotherapist both about the Tarasoff warning itself and about confidential treatment information that was associated with the warning. One court further ruled that some clinical sessions were not psychotherapy and therefore were not afforded the protection of psychotherapist-patient privilege. The continuing erosion of confidentiality has resulted in psychiatrists and other mental health professionals becoming prosecution witnesses at the criminal trials of their own patients.
Access content
To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.- Personal login
- Institutional Login
- Sign in via OpenAthens
- Register for access
-
Please login/register if you wish to pair your device and check access availability.
Not a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5 library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).