Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Protecting third parties: a decade after Tarasoff.

M J Mills, G Sullivan, S Eth

    The American Journal of Psychiatry
    |January 1, 1987
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, propanedioic acid, 1-(3,3-dimethylcyclohexyl) ethyl, ethyl ester, CAS Registry Number 478695-70-4.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-3-cyclohexene-1-carbonitrile, CAS registry number 68084-04-8.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl 3-methylthiopropionate, CAS Registry Number 13327-56-5.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, butyl butyrate, CAS Registry Number 109-21-7.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, pentyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 628-63-7.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020
    Same author

    RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, benzyl benzoate, CAS Registry Number 120-51-4.

    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association·2020

    Psychiatric patient treatment policies require updates. Current laws may lead to overly restrictive clinical practices and less informed legal decisions regarding potentially violent individuals.

    Area of Science:

    • Forensic Psychiatry
    • Mental Health Law
    • Clinical Psychology

    Background:

    • Current public policy on managing potentially violent psychiatric patients is examined.
    • Legal and ethical precedents shaping these policies are outlined.
    • The evolution of therapeutic interventions concerning patient violence is discussed, particularly in light of the Tarasoff decision.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To analyze the impact of current public policy on the treatment of potentially violent psychiatric patients.
    • To compare therapeutic approaches before and after the landmark Tarasoff decision.
    • To propose improvements for clinicians, legal standards, and legislative interventions.

    Main Methods:

    • Policy analysis of legal and ethical precedents.
    Keywords:
    Analytical ApproachLegal ApproachMental Health TherapiesProfessional Patient RelationshipTarasoff v. Regents of the University of California

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Comparative analysis of therapeutic interventions pre- and post-Tarasoff.
  • Review of clinical interpretations of legal standards.

    • Main Results:

    • Clinicians often interpret laws regarding patient violence too restrictively.
    • Existing liability standards in legal decisions lack clinical insight.
    • Legislative measures intended to absolve psychotherapists of liability may encourage reactive rather than thoughtful patient management.

    Conclusions:

    • Clinicians should be encouraged to apply a more nuanced interpretation of laws.
    • Courts must develop liability standards that are better informed by clinical practice.
    • Legislative changes specifying liability absolutions for warnings could inadvertently promote less effective patient care strategies.