To Warn Or Not To Warn: That Is The Question Home Study (3 CEs)

This webinar will satisfy your ethics requirement.

Ever since 1976 with the landmark case of Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California, there has been a dizzying array of cases dealing with various approaches to this topic. In some states, there is a Duty to Warn, in others a Duty to Protect Third Parties. In some states, the duty is mandatory and in others discretionary. Some states are also distinguished in terms of permissive or non-permissive duties. Small wonder that with all these variations, mental health professionals are often confused in terms of their obligations. Sometimes, the case law is inconsistent with the statutes within the same state. Research done regarding the knowledge of licensed men¬tal health professionals in 1988 showed that 93% of the sample surveyed did not fully understand the laws in their own states. Twenty years later, with continued exposure to the topic through continuing education, the number dropped to 76% who did not understand the laws in their own states. This webinar will attempt to reconcile these differences and provide the mental health professional with concrete steps to take in order to crystalize and under¬stand the laws and the ways to manage practices so as to minimize the risk of legal action.