Hedlund v. Superior Court of Orange County (1983)
Give this one a try later!
- Decided that a therapist who fails to carry out the prescribed duty in a
Tarasoff situation is liable for harm to any reasonably foreseeable
bystanders who are subsequently harmed by the dangerous client.
- The Hedlund decision does not create any extra duty for the therapist;
rather, it imposes a greater liability on therapists who fail to carry out their
Tarasoff duties.
Tarasoff "Veil of Immunity"
Give this one a try later!
, In carrying out the duty to protect, if a therapist warns the intended victim
and notifies a law enforcement agency, this is considered the highest
standard of protection for the potential victim.
This course of action may give the therapist a "veil of immunity" from any
lawsuits related to breaking client confidentiality and/or lawsuits that might
arise if the client subsequently carries out the threatened violence.
Tarasoff responsibilities may be satisfied by having a client involuntarily
hospitalized (Tarasoff Case, 1976). The 5150 removes the imminence of the
danger from a client who poses an immediate and imminent threat to a
reasonably identified other. However, hospitalization does not provide
immunity under the Tarasoff Statute (California Civil Code 43.92), nor does it
meet the mandated reporting responsibility (SB 127).
HIPAA Covered Providers/Covered Entities Defined
Give this one a try later!
Any health care provider who transmits covered transactions in electronic
form. This includes LMFTs who bill for insurance.
Covered providers must also provide their clients with a "Notice of Privacy
Practices" form and retain a signed copy in the client's file.
Reporting is not mandated if ALL THREE of the following conditions apply
Give this one a try later!
, 1. A dependent adult or elder has told a therapist that s/he has experienced
a form of mandated abuse, but the mandated reporter has no evidence of
abuse.
2. The dependent adult or elder has a diagnosis of a mental disorder, defect
or incapacity, or is under conservatorship because of the above conditions.
3. The therapist believes that the abuse did not occur.
A minor who consents to his/her own treatment must...
Give this one a try later!
- Sign his/her own consent form.
- Sign his/her own release authorization to disclose treatment information
to a third party.
- Assert his/her own privilege unless appointed a guardian ad litem (who
would also consent to the therapy).
Sexual Relations Between Therapist and Client: Legality, Liability, Disciplinary Action,
Timing
Give this one a try later!
, Legality: Sex with a client is prohibited by law and by ethical standards.
Therapist-client sex constitutes a felony.
Liability: The therapist is both civilly liable and criminally liable when there
have been sexual relations with a client, even if the client initiated or
consented to the sexual activity.
Disciplinary Action: California law provides for mandatory revocation of the
license of a LMFT, if facts indicate that the licensee engaged in any sexual
contact with a patient or a former patient (when that patient was terminated
for the purpose of engaging in a sexual act).
Timing: Therapists may not engage in sexual contact with a client for two
years following the termination of therapy.
Court Orders and Privilege
Give this one a try later!
A therapist's first response upon receiving a court order is to disclose
exactly what the order requires. A court order negates privilege; therefore,
there is no obligation to assert privilege when receiving a court order.
If the child is a ward of the state, who holds privilege? Who may exercise the
privilege?
Give this one a try later!
If a minor client is a ward of the state, the client holds privilege and the
privilege will be exercised by a legal representative, such as a judge or
lawyer who represents the child.
Evidence Code 1024
Give this one a try later!
- Decided that a therapist who fails to carry out the prescribed duty in a
Tarasoff situation is liable for harm to any reasonably foreseeable
bystanders who are subsequently harmed by the dangerous client.
- The Hedlund decision does not create any extra duty for the therapist;
rather, it imposes a greater liability on therapists who fail to carry out their
Tarasoff duties.
Tarasoff "Veil of Immunity"
Give this one a try later!
, In carrying out the duty to protect, if a therapist warns the intended victim
and notifies a law enforcement agency, this is considered the highest
standard of protection for the potential victim.
This course of action may give the therapist a "veil of immunity" from any
lawsuits related to breaking client confidentiality and/or lawsuits that might
arise if the client subsequently carries out the threatened violence.
Tarasoff responsibilities may be satisfied by having a client involuntarily
hospitalized (Tarasoff Case, 1976). The 5150 removes the imminence of the
danger from a client who poses an immediate and imminent threat to a
reasonably identified other. However, hospitalization does not provide
immunity under the Tarasoff Statute (California Civil Code 43.92), nor does it
meet the mandated reporting responsibility (SB 127).
HIPAA Covered Providers/Covered Entities Defined
Give this one a try later!
Any health care provider who transmits covered transactions in electronic
form. This includes LMFTs who bill for insurance.
Covered providers must also provide their clients with a "Notice of Privacy
Practices" form and retain a signed copy in the client's file.
Reporting is not mandated if ALL THREE of the following conditions apply
Give this one a try later!
, 1. A dependent adult or elder has told a therapist that s/he has experienced
a form of mandated abuse, but the mandated reporter has no evidence of
abuse.
2. The dependent adult or elder has a diagnosis of a mental disorder, defect
or incapacity, or is under conservatorship because of the above conditions.
3. The therapist believes that the abuse did not occur.
A minor who consents to his/her own treatment must...
Give this one a try later!
- Sign his/her own consent form.
- Sign his/her own release authorization to disclose treatment information
to a third party.
- Assert his/her own privilege unless appointed a guardian ad litem (who
would also consent to the therapy).
Sexual Relations Between Therapist and Client: Legality, Liability, Disciplinary Action,
Timing
Give this one a try later!
, Legality: Sex with a client is prohibited by law and by ethical standards.
Therapist-client sex constitutes a felony.
Liability: The therapist is both civilly liable and criminally liable when there
have been sexual relations with a client, even if the client initiated or
consented to the sexual activity.
Disciplinary Action: California law provides for mandatory revocation of the
license of a LMFT, if facts indicate that the licensee engaged in any sexual
contact with a patient or a former patient (when that patient was terminated
for the purpose of engaging in a sexual act).
Timing: Therapists may not engage in sexual contact with a client for two
years following the termination of therapy.
Court Orders and Privilege
Give this one a try later!
A therapist's first response upon receiving a court order is to disclose
exactly what the order requires. A court order negates privilege; therefore,
there is no obligation to assert privilege when receiving a court order.
If the child is a ward of the state, who holds privilege? Who may exercise the
privilege?
Give this one a try later!
If a minor client is a ward of the state, the client holds privilege and the
privilege will be exercised by a legal representative, such as a judge or
lawyer who represents the child.
Evidence Code 1024
