Should a Therapist Reveal Privilaged Information if a Third Party is Endangered?

573 Words2 Pages
Court Case: Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California (1974)
Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California (1974) a court case which Tatiana Tarasoff, a University of California Berkeley’s student was killed. Prosenjit Poddar pursued Tatiana while she was alone in her home. He started the aggression in her home and chased into the street and stabbed her seventeen times causing her death. Previously he described his intentions and depression when he asked Dr. Laurence Moore at Berkeley medical center. The diagnosed of paranoid schizophrenia was presented by the doctor. Dr. Moore felt the risk against Tarasoff and shared the situation with two other doctors and determined that Poddar should be committed to a psychiatric hospital and to the police. Poddar was release after he promised to stay away from her. She never received any alert about her risks by the doctor or pilice. Poddar killed her on the night of October 27, 1969. During the criminal trial he pleaded not guilty because of his insanity. His prior evaluation to the murder presented evidence that Poddar was no guilty because of his mental state because he was insane and demonstrated a paranoid schizophrenia. He came back to India and had a normal life. Tarasoff’s family sued the doctors and police. The charges against the police were dropped because the police were immune to the suit. It was consider that the psychiatrics failed in their duty to warn and protect Tatiana.
Discussion
I

    More about Should a Therapist Reveal Privilaged Information if a Third Party is Endangered?

      Get Access