Which legal decision established the “duty to warn” for psychologists?

The “duty to warn” for psychologists was established by the Tarasoff Decision. This landmark case arose from a situation where a mental health professional learned that a patient posed a serious risk of harm to an identifiable individual. In this case, the California Supreme Court recognized that when a therapist has knowledge of a specific threat against a third party, they have an obligation to take reasonable steps to disclose that information to ensure the safety of the potential victim. This created a legal precedent emphasizing the importance of protecting individuals from foreseeable harm that may arise from a client’s statements or behavior.

The Tarasoff Decision underscored that the responsibility of mental health professionals extends beyond confidentiality in situations where there is a clear and imminent risk to another person. Thus, this ruling has had a profound impact on the practice of psychology, obligating clinicians to consider the welfare of potential victims when assessing the responsibilities toward their clients.

The other choices relate to different aspects of mental health law and do not pertain to the specific obligation to warn. The McNaughton Rule is concerned with the insanity defense in criminal cases, the Durham Rule pertains to the legal criteria for mental illness, and the McKinney Act deals with homelessness and the provision of services to the homeless population