About the ads

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tarasoff decision

Discussion in 'Step I' started by Phloston, May 6, 2012.

  1. This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors and sponsors. Thank you.
  1. Phloston

    Phloston Vegemite Gold Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    2,492
    Location:
    Australia
    Status:
    MD/PhD Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member

    SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)
    Under the Tarasoff decision, must the physician (e.g. psychiatrist) always report confidentiality-excepted information to the potential victim AND law enforcement, or just to the potential victim?

    Thanks a lot,
  2. Convalaria

    Convalaria

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2012
    Messages:
    194
    Status:
    Medical Student
    Tarasoff I decision: physicians warn a potential victim if they truly believe the patient he/she may be harmed (e.g. abused spouse)

    Tarasoff II decision: physicians warn a potential victim if they truly believe the patient he/she may be harmed AND protect (e.g. children)

    This was explanation of one of the Kaplan Qbank questions.
  3. Phloston

    Phloston Vegemite Gold Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    2,492
    Location:
    Australia
    Status:
    MD/PhD Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    I'm wondering if there are certain times that law enforcement is contacted as well (e.g. sometimes, always, never).
  4. DrDJShik

    DrDJShik

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    44
    Location:
    Chicago
    Status:
    Medical Student
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    From my experience, you usually see just victim or victim and police but not both as two different choices...i think its always both tho
  5. VisionaryTics

    VisionaryTics SeƱor Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,247
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Status:
    Medical Student
    SDN 5+ Year Member
    BRS Behavioral Science says the physician must notify law enforcement or social service agency AND warn the intended victim if the patient poses a credible threat.
  6. Phloston

    Phloston Vegemite Gold Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    2,492
    Location:
    Australia
    Status:
    MD/PhD Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    Nice. I'm ~30 pages into BRS BS right now, so eventually I'll get to that ;-)

    This is why I had asked (PrntScr image from USMLE Rx):

    Notice that in this case, the potential victim AND law enforcement need to be contacted.

    However, I recall having seen a question in Rx some time ago where the patient was diagnosed with HIV and strictly said that he didn't plan on telling his partner but still planned on using appropriate protection. In this case, the physician needed to contact the patient's partner, but NOT law enforcement, because they said a crime of intent hadn't been present.

    Fun stuff...

    Attached Files:

    • FA.jpg
      File size:
      45.2 KB
      Views:
      20
  7. Morsetlis

    Morsetlis SGU MS-3

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,901
    Location:
    St. George's, Grenada
    Status:
    Medical Student
    SDN 2+ Year Member
    There is no intention of crime. You do not wear gloves to intend to poke yourself with a needle, even if you have no training in giving injections or the proper methods of needle disposal.

    Note: I neither agree nor sympathize with the patient, but how do you compare that case to a parent smoking with children in the house?

Share This Page


About the ads