TO: All Employees

FROM: Zachary Robertson, Administrator

DATE: July 2, 1976

SUBJECT: Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California

As human service professionals, the ruling of the Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California is very important to the ethical code we currently practice. By ruling in favor of Tarasoff, the court now implements the duty to warn and the duty to protect. Directly:

“The Court stated that when a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger.”

The discharge of this duty may require you to take one or more steps, depending on the nature of the case. Thus, it may call for you to warn the intended victim or others likely to apprise the victim of the danger, to notify the police, or to take whatever other steps are reasonably necessary under the circumstances. This legislation not only affects the human service’s code of ethics, but also our decision making process. The following will provide, in greater detail, what that means to you.

Human Services Code of Ethics

The primary functions of our code of ethics are to establish guidelines for professional behavior and to assist members of the profession in establishing a professional identity. The Tarasoff case seemingly presents limitations to our current code of ethics by acknowledging that there are possible exceptions. These exceptions are not necessarily present in every case, but when they do arise, it is important that you display ethical decision-making.

Ethical Decision Making You should continue to follow the current code of ethics, but as a human service professional, you are now responsible for your personal, professional judgment. There