Past Releases and Reports
About Privacilla
Privacy Fundamentals
Privacy and Government
Privacy and Business
Online Privacy
Financial Privacy
Medical Privacy
Your thinking can help third parties if you send it to Privacilla!
Your Source for Privacy Policy from a Free-market, Pro-technology Perspective

Click to return to the Medical Privacy outline

Home > Privacy and Business > Medical Privacy > Exceptions to Medical Privacy > Disclosure to Protect Third Parties

Disclosure to Protect Third Parties

In the 1976 case of Tarasoff v. Regents, the California Supreme Court held that a mental health professional has an obligation to take steps to protect identified third parties whom the professional believes might be endangered by a client.

Though the decision has been criticized by a number of groups, it reflects the idea that even medical privacy is not an absolute value. It may have to give way in the face of clear threats to individuals or the public.

To give mental health professionals a protective zone in which to use their best judgement, many states have enacted laws allowing medical professionals to take steps, including notifying the threatened individual or law enforcement officials, without becoming liable for breaching the privacy of the patient. Most also protect the professional from liability if they decide not to act.

All states either mandate or permit disclosure in situations where a third party might be at risk for harm, such as child and elder abuse. Once again, in this area, privacy is subordinated to society's interest in preventing clear threats to individuals or the public.


Comments? (Subject: ProtectiveDisclosure)

[updated 12/29/00]

©2000-2003 All content subject to the Privacilla Public License.