The prediction of violent behavior and the duty to protect third parties

Wettstein, Robert M.

doi:10.1002/bsl.2370020306

Cited by 23 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 126 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To measure these expected benefits one must assess the probability of harm. To the extent psychiatrists have difficulty making accurate predictions for a given individual, the judgment about benefits is clouded (Wettstein, 1984).…”

Section: A Basis For Civil Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civil commitment: An economic perspective

Rubiny

1988

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: A Basis For Civil Commitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Civil commitment: An economic perspective

Rubiny

1988

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The low degree of certitude in predicting violence on the part of psychotherapists is well documented in the research literature (Wettstein, 1984), but this does not, in and of itself, make all acts of violence unforeseeable on the part of a psychotherapist. The legal test is one of “reasonable foreseeability,” not “certainty.” That is, would a prudent psychotherapist have predicted violence on the part of the client (Barefoot v. Estelle, 1983)?…”

Section: Assessing Violence Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outpatient psychotherapy with dangerous clients: A model for clinical decision making.

Truscott

Evans²,

Mansell³

1995

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The precedent-setting 1976 judicial decision of Tarasoffv. Regents of the University of California established a duty to protect whereby psychotherapists are expected to exercise reasonable care to protect the potential victims of their clients' violent behavior. However, no standard of care for dangerous clients has been established. In this article, the authors present a model for clinical decision making to determine the best interventions for dealing with dangerous outpatient clients. The model takes into account the degree of violence risk and the strength of the therapeutic alliance. Four cases are presented to illustrate the application of the model.Outpatient psychotherapy with a dangerous client poses a conflict for therapists between therapeutic, ethical, and legal duties to the client and a legal duty to protect any potential victims of the client's violent behavior. If a threat of violence is made known to others, either for the purpose of warning a potential victim or alerting law enforcement officials to prevent the violent act, it violates the client's confidence and could result in the client feeling intense embarrassment or anger; being charged, arrested, and possibly convicted of a criminal offense; or being denied or refusing further treatment. The therapist could also face disciplinary'or civil charges for breaching confidentiality. If, on the other hand, the threat is kept confidential, any subsequent violence might have been prevented and the therapist may feel guilt, anxiety, lowered confidence, and a reluctance to treat similar clients; also, the therapist may face a lawsuit.Before the 1976 California Supreme Court decision of Tarasoffv. Regents of the University of California, psychotherapists tended not to be concerned about legal liability for their clients* behavior outside the therapy. The Tarasoffcomt ruled, however, DEREK TRUSCOTT received his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Windsor in 1989. He is currently a psychological consultant with the Workers' Compensation Board of Alberta,

show abstract

“…Menzies, Jackson, and Glasberg found that psychiatrists used past history of violent offenses, previous incarcerations, and the type of current charge to assess dangerousness. 63 Since it was learned that a variety of variables contribute to the assessment of dangerousness, part of the growth of the new scientific research was provided in the form of empirical analyses of the decision-making strategies of therapists. Wettstein proposed that from these empirical studies a standard for the profession might emerge.…”

Section: The Rationality Of Boundary-workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rhetorical strategy of boundary-work

Holmquest

1990

Argumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An extended version of Gieryn's notion of 'boundary-work', supplemented with insights of Thomas Goodnight, is used to represent the central role of rhetoric in disputes on the boundary of science and the public. From a study of the Tarasoff-case it is shown that the rhetorical process of turning obstacles into resources works to move the boundary between a science and the law. It is concluded that rhetorical scholars can and must play a part in the resolution of boundary disputes and that concrete case-studies of boundary-work may deepen criticism of argument.

show abstract

The prediction of violent behavior and the duty to protect third parties

Abstract: ABSTRACT

Cited by 23 publications

References 126 publications

Civil commitment: An economic perspective

Civil commitment: An economic perspective

Outpatient psychotherapy with dangerous clients: A model for clinical decision making.

The rhetorical strategy of boundary-work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About