Case Brief Soldano V. O’daniels Court of Appeals of California March 28, 1983 Statement of Facts a Patron of Happy Jack’s Saloon Went Across the Street to the Circle Inn to Talk with the Owner of the Two Establishments.

The duty to warn and protect is the result of the Supreme Court case Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California. (Gehring 1982) In this case the courts decided that a psychotherapist having knowledge of the

The patient was initially admitted due to terminal cancer, his family wanted him to have a procedure, but he elected not to do so due to the risk of being in his mid-eighties. Instead, he remained in the hospital for comfort measures because the pain was unbearable without medication. His son did not accept the fact that his father was dying and this created family arguments about the care of the patient because the family did not believe the patient knew what he was doing by declining treatment.

An emergency call came in at 9:45 am made by Doug Greene who is a neighbor of the victim Anna Garcia claiming that he had not seen Anna Garcia since her normal morning walk at 6:30 am the previous morning and that the dog had been barking for 2 hours, he had also mentioned that Anna Garcia was wearing a sweater when he had seen her the previous morning while experiencing a 92 degree heat wave. Mr.Greene had called Anna’s telephone with no answer, and had also rang the doorbell with no answer. The EMT and local police had arrived to the scene at 9:56 am, needing to break the door down. EMS discovered Anna Garcia laying face down, dead.

The court held the psychologist responsible for the murder of his girlfriend and for not informing of the intent to harm. I believe Justice Tobriner said it best, “the protective privilege ends where the public peril begins.”

Social work practice would also include teaching of all relevant subjects and matter of conducting research into problems of conflict and human behaviour. The Court suggests one last policy justification: since psychotherapist privilege statutes exist in all the States, the failure to recognize a privilege in federal courts "would frustrate the purposes of the state legislation that was enacted to foster these confidential communications."

Merits: The respondent, Daniel Murphy, was convicted by a jury in an Oregon court of the second-degree murder of his wife. The victim died by strangulation in her home in the city of Portland, and abrasions and lacerations were found on her throat. There was no sign of a break-in or robbery. Word of the murder was sent to the estranged husband, Daniel Murphy. Upon receiving the message, Murphy promptly telephoned the Portland police and voluntarily came into Portland for questioning. Shortly after the respondent’s arrival at the station house, where he was met by retained counsel, the

This may lead to a difficult evaluation, the psychologist needs to obtain information that may be incriminating and not benefit the defendant if they provide it. The defendant has no control over how that information is used. (Datz,1989) Such issues as prescription authority ,where the psychologist is able to prescribe medication for their client has become an ethical issue. Many psychologists themselves believe that prescription should be be given by medical graduates with full training (Boschert 1998).This is backed up by 43% of responding to an American Psychological Association survey indicating that they believed that full medical training would be required for prescription.(APA 1992a

(TCO D) A patient's family may be actively involved in end-of-life decisions for patients who are incapacitated or incompetent. Compare and contrast two legal cases that address the rights

relationship with the doctor has been established. In the case Hall v. Hilbun there was a

The judicial precedence set by Tasaroff v Regents of the University of Caliornia.17 Cal.3d 425,551 P.2D 334,131 Cal. Rptn 14 (1976) demonstrates vividly that unlike their counterparts in other medical disciplines, Psychiatrists may need a lower disclosure threshold given that they may see patients who are mentally volatile and potentially dangerous!( Farlex,2012).In this scenario, Prosenjit Poddar, a mental health patient student at the University of California, informed his Psychologist of his intent to murder Tatiana Tasaroff two months in advance. The Psychologist went ahead and disclosed this information to the campus police who held the patient for a brief period and released him upon deeming him rational only to end up killing Tasaroff !The

The ethical dilemma I wish to explore is The Duty to Warn. This refers to the duty of a counselor, therapist to breach one of the most important bonds between a client and a therapist; the law of confidentiality. The therapist has the right to break confidentiality without the fear of being brought up for legal action. If the therapist believes that the client poses a danger, or is a threat to himself, someone else, or society as a whole, the therapist must decide how serious of a threat the client may be, then if he decides it’s a serious issue, he must notify the person in danger, which would e the third party, or the police, or other people who may be in the

While at the hospital, surgery is performed; however, the victim dies on the operating table. It is later discovered the hospital staff gave the patient medication during the procedure in which the victim was allergic to, but was not the cause of death. The cause of death was determined to be the severed artery and loss of blood. Even though the injuries were life threatening and the victim died anyway, the defendant could argue the hospital staff was the proximate cause of the victim’s death by giving them the medication they are allergic to. This should not release the defendant from a murder charge since the victim died from injuries they sustained from the stabbing. With the artery being severed, there was no hope for the victim. The medication given to the patient, while negligent in the dose administration, did not cause the death of the

Plaintiffs, Christine Rotolo sued San Jose Sports and Entertainment LLC, Inc. that has responsibility of a teenager’s death. The teenager was died while participating in an ice hockey game, due to the sudden cardiac arrest. San Jose Sport and Entertainment LLC is the operator and service provider of the ice hockey facility. Christine Rotolo stated San Jose Sport and Entertainment LLC is the operator of the air hockey facility and has the duty to notify users of the facility of the existence and location of an automatic external defibrillator (AED) at the facility. And, San Jose Sport and Entertainment LLC has the responsibility of negligence of the wrongful death. Before appealed, the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California, has the judgment in favor of the operators. Then, the parents appealed.

On 06-06-2018, at approximately 1818 hours, I was contacted by Cpl. F. Capitano, in reference to a suicide at 11513 Lake Ridge Road. Upon arrival I met with Cpl. G. Thomas, who advised what occurred. I then entered the residence with Deputy E. Palacios, who was the first deputy on scene, Deputy B. Shannon, who is the originating deputy and Crime Scene Tech S. Mawhinney, who responded to process the scene.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence is the study of how aspects of legal system impacts the mental wellness.The implications of law on mental health is an ignored part of law. The research deals with the core idea of therapeutic jurisprudence and how it effects people placing reliance on various laws and legal practices prevalent in the legal system.In 1987, David Wexler conveyed a paper to the National Institute of Mental Health in the United States coining the term “Therapeutic Jurisprudence”.Therapeutic jurisprudence is the “study of the role of the law as a therapeutic agent”. Therapeutic Jurisprudence proposed that psychiatry, and extensive controls of the sociologies had significant depths of knowledge to offer to the field of law and psychological wellness and that the law and the legal system ought to endeavour to utilize the knowledge where appropriate. Therapeutic Jurisprudence is an interdisciplinary way to deal with the study and routine of law and focuses on the regularly undervalued part of the law and lawful performing artists' part in delivering helpful or anti-therapeutic results. It is a regulating structure that backers the utilization of the sociologies to illuminate the procedures and results of lawful communications and techniques. Therapeutic Jurisprudence impacts the procedures of the court and inclinations an extended rehabilitative part for criminal attorneys. Therapeutic Jurisprudence likewise impacts the way attorneys