Anfang S A, Appelbaum P S
Law and Psychiatry Program, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, USA.
Harv Rev Psychiatry. 1996 Jul-Aug;4(2):67-76. doi: 10.3109/10673229609030526.
Since the Tarasoff decision by the California Supreme Court in 1974, mental health clinicians have struggled to balance their duty of confidentiality to their patients against the duty to protect third parties from potential violence. This article explores the development of this issue over the last 20 years, with a focus on ways that Tarasoff has and has not affected clinical practice. Reviewing the evolution of case and statutory law, we discuss appropriate clinical responses for the mental health practitioner who faces a potential "duty to protect" situation.
自1974年加利福尼亚州最高法院做出塔索夫裁决以来,心理健康临床医生一直在努力平衡对患者的保密义务与保护第三方免受潜在暴力侵害的义务。本文探讨了该问题在过去20年中的发展情况,重点关注塔索夫裁决对临床实践产生影响和未产生影响的方面。通过回顾判例法和成文法的演变,我们讨论了心理健康从业者在面临潜在的“保护义务”情况时应采取的适当临床应对措施。