Describe Tarasoff duty and how a practitioner assesses risk and decides whether to warn or protect a third party.

• A. Duty arises solely when a client threatens a coworker.
• B. Duty to warn/protect arises when a credible threat of serious harm by a client to identifiable individuals exists; evaluate imminence, specificity, and protective actions; consult supervisor and document.
• C. Duty to warn applies to all clients regardless of risk.
• D. Duty to warn is obsolete.

Answer: (B)

Tarasoff duty is triggered when a client poses a credible threat of serious harm to an identifiable person. The standout idea is that the responsibility to warn or protect isn’t universal for every statement a client makes; it activates only when there is a believable risk to a specific person or group. In practice, you assess risk by considering three factors: imminence (how soon might the harm occur), specificity (is there a concrete target, a clear plan, and the means to carry it out), and the effectiveness of protective actions (what steps could actually reduce the risk, such as warning the potential victim, notifying authorities, or arranging hospitalization). When the threat meets this threshold, the clinician should take protective actions to reduce risk and should consult a supervisor and document the assessment and steps taken. If there isn’t a credible threat to an identifiable individual, there’s no duty to warn or protect beyond usual treatment; confidentiality stays important. This aligns with the principle that the duty to warn or protect arises from a credible threat to identifiable victims, and the response is guided by risk evaluation, protective options, supervision, and documentation.