The precedent-setting 1976 US court decision of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California established a “duty to protect” whereby psychotherapists are held responsible to protect the potential victims of their clients’ violent behaviour. The purpose of this article is to review and discuss this duty in the context of Canadian law and the 1991 Alberta court decision of Wenden v. Trikha, Royal Alexandra Hospital and Yaltho. The current Canadian interpretation of the duty to protect and guidelines for avoiding such liability are presented.
References
1.
PresserWLHandbook of the law of torts, fourth edition. St.Paul MN: West,1971.
2.
Crits v. Sylvester, O.R. 132, 1956.
3.
Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 17 Cal.3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 1976.
4.
KamenarPDPsychiatrists’ duty to warn of a dangerous patient: a survey of the law.Behavioral Sciences and the Law1984; 2: 259–272.
5.
Wenden v. Trikha, Royal Alexandra Hospital and Yaltho, 116 A R.2d 81, 1991.
6.
People v. Poddar, 518 P.2d. 342, 1974.
7.
Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 118 Cal. Rptr. 129, 529 P.2d 533, 1974.
8.
MeyerRG, LandisER, HaysJRLaw for the psychotherapist.New York: Norton,1988.
WettsteinRMThe prediction of violent behavior and the duty to protect third parties.Behavioral Sciences and the Law1988; 2: 291–317.
12.
Barefoot v. Estelle, 51 LW 5190, 1983.
13.
G. versus G., 1 O.R. 361, 1964.
14.
MillerDJ, ThelenMHKnowledge and beliefs about confidentiality in psychotherapy.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice1986; 17: 15–19.
15.
SchmidD, AppelbaumPS, RothL.H.Confidentiality in psychiatry: a study of the patient's view.Hosp Community Psychiatry1983; 34: 353–355.
16.
WeinerMF, ShumanDWThe privilege study.Arch Gen Psychiatry1983; 40: 1027–1030.
17.
LindenthalJJ, ThomasCSPsychiatrists, the public, and confidentiality.J Nerv Ment Dis1982; 170: 319–323.
18.
MerluzziTV, BrischettoCSBreach of confidentiality and perceived trustworthiness of counselors.Journal of Counseling Psychology1983; 30: 245–251.
19.
WoodsKM, McNamaraJRConfidentiality: its effect on interviewee behavior.Professional Psychology1980; 11: 714–721.
20.
Regina v. Potvin, 16 C.R.N.S. 233, 1971.
21.
Regina v. Smith, 8 O. A. C. 241, 1985.
22.
Stewart v. Extendicare Ltd., 4 W.W.R. 559, 1986.
23.
MillsMJThe so-called duty to warn: the psychotherapeutic duty to protect third parties from patients’ violent acts.Behav Science Law1984; 2: 237–257.
24.
MeltonGB, PetrilaJ, PoythressN.G.Psychological evaluations for the courts: a handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers.New York: Guilford Press,1987.
25.
ChambersRS, HeustonRFVSalmond and Hueston on the law of torts, fourth edition.London: Sweet & Maxwell,1981.
26.
ShapiroDPsychological evaluation and expert testimony: a practical guide to forensic work.New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold,1984.
27.
FuleroSMTarasoff: ten years later.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice1988; 19: 184–190.
28.
LitwackTR, SchlesingerLBAssessing and predicting violence: research, law, and applications. In: WeinerIB, HessA eds. Handbook of forensic psychology.New York: Wiley, 1987: 204–257.
29.
MonahanJPredicting violent behavior: an assessment of clinical techniques.Beverly Hills CA: Sage,1981.
30.
Statistics Canada.Homicide in the family.Juristat Service Bulletin1989; 9: 1–11.
31.
RothLH, MeiselADangerousness, confidentiality, and the duty to warn.Am J Psychiatry1977; 134: 508–511.
32.
WulsinLR, BursztajnH, GutheilTGUnexpected clinical features of the Tarasoff decision: the therapeutic alliance and the “duty to warn.”Am J Psychiatry1983; 140: 601–603.
33.
SlovenkoRPsychotherapy and confidentiality.Cleveland State Law Review1975; 24: 375–391.
34.
EberleinLLegal duty and confidentiality of psychologists: Tarasoff and Haines.Can Psychol1980; 21: 49–58.
