The duty of therapists to third parties

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper discusses the duty that therapists owe to persons other than patients. It discusses leading cases in the law of torts, beginning with the landmark 1928 case on duty in negligence law of Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.; then the 1980 decision of Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospital, which drew a distinction between “direct” and “indirect” harm; then the 1976 decision of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, which set out a theory of “special relationship” of a therapist to a person harmed by a patient; and finally the 1994 decision of Ramona v. Isabella, Rose & Western Medical Center, which involved “recovered memory” that had an adverse impact on family members of a patient. The Ramona case has raised questions about the responsibility of therapists to third persons for interpretations made to patients in the course of therapy.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: