Tarasoff

Confidentiality and informed consent are a crucial factor in the field of psychology. Clients expect that they will be able to speak freely, without the fear of being judged, or their information being breached. In 1969, on behalf of the Tarasoff case, the California Supreme Court ruled that therapists be required to protect third parties from harm. Before consenting to treatment, clients are aware of this requirement. They then are allowed to accept or refuse treatment, however, consent is not valid unless it is volunteered. For example, consent is not considered valid if the therapist feels that the client is being coerced in any way. What exactly lead to this new requirement? The unfortunate killing of a young woman, named Tatiana Tarasoff.

In the summer of 1969, Prosenjit Poddar revealed to his therapist, that he planned on killing a young woman, her name was never mentioned. His therapist, Dr. Moore, took his threat seriously and immediately contacted campus police. Campus police apprehended him, but was soon released, stating that he appeared rational and swore he would not hurt the woman (“Confidentiality after Tarasoff,” 1994). Unfortunately, two months later, Tatiana Tarasoff was murdered at the hands Prosenjit Poddar. Her family filed a lawsuit against the campus police, mental health staff, and the Regents of the University of California; they were never notified of Poddar’s threats towards Tarasoff. (“Confidentiality after Tarasoff,” 1994) The California Supreme Court's later ruled; when a therapist is confronted by a patient that makes accountable threats towards another individual, they must take logical steps in an attempt to prevent harm towards the mentioned individual ("American Psychological Association", 2015).

Psychologists are obligated to keep their patients information confidential. They are only allowed to disclose patient information if it is by court order, the client has given written or oral permission, or an advocate consents on...