Also known as: Tarasoff duties · Tarasoff rule · duty to warn · Tarasoff warning
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A duty imposed on psychotherapists to exercise reasonable care to warn an identifiable victim when a patient poses a serious danger of violence to that person.
Dr. Moore treats patient Poddar who states during a session that he intends to kill Tatiana. Moore notifies campus police but takes no further steps to alert Tatiana or her family. Tatiana is later killed by Poddar. Tatiana's parents sue the therapists for failure to warn the known victim.
Therapist Jones learns that patient Smith plans to shoot his identifiable former roommate. Jones contacts police but does not warn the roommate or family. The roommate is killed. The family sues Jones for breaching the duty to warn the known victim.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Therapist learns during treatment that the patient plans to kill a named former girlfriend. The therapist does not warn the woman or her family. After the patient carries out the threat, the victim's parents sue the therapist for failure to warn the identifiable target.
Therapist Adams treats patient Baker who threatens to stab a named coworker. Adams warns police but fails to contact the coworker. The coworker is stabbed. The coworker's family sues Adams for not warning the identifiable victim.
Therapist Lee learns patient Rivera intends to attack a specifically named neighbor. Lee notifies authorities but does not warn the neighbor. After the attack the neighbor's estate sues Lee for failure to warn the known target.
Therapist Patel is told by patient Quinn of a plan to harm a named ex-spouse. Patel alerts police but does not contact the ex-spouse. After the harm occurs the ex-spouse's family sues Patel for breaching the duty to warn the identifiable person.
The duty arises when the therapist determines or should determine that the patient poses a danger to an identifiable person. Many jurisdictions limit the duty to cases involving a known or readily identifiable victim rather than the public at large.
The therapist must exercise reasonable care to warn the potential victim or take other steps such as notifying police when the threat is serious and the victim is identifiable. The precise steps depend on professional judgment and the circumstances of the threat.
The original Tarasoff decision recognized a claim for failure to warn but rejected a claim for failure to confine the patient. Subsequent cases in many states have focused on the warning obligation rather than involuntary commitment.
…of 1963. We shall conclude that plaintiffs' complaints state a cause of action against the psychotherapists for breach of the duty to warn Tatiana or her parents, but that they do not state a cause of action against the police for failure to warn or failure to confine. We further conclude that the police defendants are immune…