Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Recent Case: United States V. Hayes, 227 F.3d 578 (6th Cir. 2000), Emily Gold Waldman
Recent Case: United States V. Hayes, 227 F.3d 578 (6th Cir. 2000), Emily Gold Waldman
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In 1996, the Supreme Court recognized the existence of a federal psychotherapist-patient privilege in Jaffee v. Redmond. The Court did not explain, however, how this evidentiary privilege should coexist with a psychotherapist's so-called Tarasoff duty to breach confidentiality when necessary to protect third parties against whom a patient has articulated serious threats. Jaffee included a footnote indicating that the privilege was not intended to invalidate this duty, but left unclear whether the privilege continues once disclosure of the patient's threats has breached confidentiality. Indeed, the two circuits that have considered this issue since Jaffee have adopted divergent approaches. The Tenth …
Confidentiality And The "Dangerous" Patient: Implications Of Tarasoff For Psychiatrists And Lawyers, Vanessa Merton
Confidentiality And The "Dangerous" Patient: Implications Of Tarasoff For Psychiatrists And Lawyers, Vanessa Merton
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This essay examines the role conflict of the professional whose patient or client may be “dangerous” to others, and the ways in which professional standards of ethics and practice, incorporated by judicial ruling, contribute to that role conflict. The paper's focus is on the plight of the psychiatrist, but it also addresses the strain felt by the lawyer who either represents such a client or is asked to advise a psychiatrist who has such a patient. It suggests that health-care providers are not altogether justified in assigning sole responsibility for some of their professional difficulties to the law's incursions on …