Interoffice Memo

interoffice memorandum
to: | All Employees |
from: | Natalie spencer
subject: | in regards to the ruling of tarasoff vs regents of the unversity of california |
date: | December 1, 1976 |
cc: | |
| |
            The California Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Tarasoff (1976) legally
supported a “duty to warn’ possible victims of clients once counselors have this information.
            When therapist determines or pursuant to the standards of his profession
should determine, that his patient present a serious danger of violence to another, he
incurs on obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such
          danger. The discharge of this duty may require the therapist to take one or more
steps, depending on the nature of the case. Thus, if may call for him or her to warn
the intended victim or others likely to apprise the victim of danger, notify the police
or take whatever steps are reasonably necessary.
The Tarasoff case affected ethical decision-making for human service professional
simply made one look at their moral responsibility in the situation, what can be
services or actions can take place to ensure safety for the clients or those around
him/her and understand the importance for which is there for the better good of the
human service profession which is the code of ethics and the ethical standards.
Standards or codes, help clarify the professional’s responsibilities to clients to the
agency, and to society. Typically, an ethics includes items that state the goals or aim
of the profession, that protect the client, that provide guidance to professional
behavior, and that contribute to a professional identity for the helper.
Ethical codes do have limitations, they cannot cover every situation. They do
however, present framework for ethical behavior, although their exact interpretation
will depend on the situation to which they are being applied. Members who are bound...