Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12202/9716| Title: | Duty to protect versus duty to maintain confidentiality: When does one trump the other? |
| Authors: | Reiter, Elisa Pollack, Daniel 0000-0001-7323-6928 |
| Keywords: | duty to protect confidentiality duty to warn Ewing v. Goldstein (2004) third party informant Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California threat of bodily harm |
| Issue Date: | 28-Dec-2023 |
| Publisher: | ALM |
| Citation: | Reiter, E., & Pollack, D. (2023, December 28). Duty to protect versus duty to maintain confidentiality: When does one trump the other? The New York Law Journal. https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2023/12/28/duty-to-protect-versus-duty-to-maintain-confidentiality-when-does-one-trump-the-other/ |
| Series/Report no.: | The New York Law Journal;December 28, 2023 |
| Abstract: | Confidentiality facilitates honest communication by assuring patients that the innermost details of their lives, shared with their health care providers, will remain private. Yet, nearly 50 years ago, the Tarasoff case imposed a duty to warn on California mental health professionals, requiring them to take reasonable steps to protect potential victims of their clients. Numerous states followed suit. |
| Description: | Analysis |
| URI: | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376885828_Duty_to_protect_versus_duty_to_maintain_confidentiality_When_does_one_trump_the_other https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12202/9716 |
| ISSN: | 0028-7326 |
| Appears in Collections: | Wurzweiler School of Social Work: Faculty publications |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reiter Pollack artNYLJ Duty to protect.pdf | 715.07 kB | Adobe PDF |  View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
