Assignment Prompt & Instructions
[>Sociology homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/social-science-sociology)
DUTY TO WARN IN SOCIAL WORK
– a year ago
**files (2)**
– ## Module14AssignmentExample-WhitePaperHerbertvs.Tarasoff.pdf
– ## DUTYTOWARN.docx
**## Module14AssignmentExample-WhitePaperHerbertvs.Tarasoff.pdf**
Sara Alexander
Herbert We Get Rid of This Taras-Awful Rule?
The infamous “Tarasoff duty”, decided during the landmark case, Tarasoff v. The
Regents of the University of California deemed it mandatory for a psychotherapist to warn and
protect an intended victim against danger if they perceived their client as a threat to said victim
(Herbert, 2002). Ventura psychiatrist Dr. Paul Herbert (2002) suggests an adjustment to the
language which would allow the therapist to decide if and when it is appropriate to warn the
victim. His suggestion is to make it clear that a therapist can warn, but is not required to, nor can
be held civilly liable.
As reflected in the 1996 Supreme Court case, Jaffee v. Redmond, therapy to support
mental health is an essential component of American citizens’ overall health (Lens, 2000) and
thus rules and laws affecting the delivery of this public good deserve thoughtfulness and careful
consideration. Holding therapists liable for not warning a potential victim of danger significantly
impairs the quality of care they are able to give. Confidentiality is essential in a therapist-client
relationship. Taking away the assurance that the client’s words will only be heard by the
therapist creates a barrier to their willingness to be open, truthful, and vulnerable, compromising
the effectiveness of the therapy. Additionally, what justification is there for requiring this duty in
these specific circumstances? Should a friend or coach be held liable in the same way? The
argument that it is due to the nature of the professional relationship does not stand. Therapists do
not possess some supernatural skill to predict a client’s violent potential. While training and
assessments exist, they are not computer algorithms. Holding a therapist liable to make this
judgment correctly is preposterous. Because of the complex nature of working with humans and
the high potential for error, Herbert’s suggested shift in language, protecting the therapist from
liability and allowing them to make their best judgment without fear of retribution, is the only
Sara Alexander
appropriate option.
There may be a concern that this shift in language will result in violence and potential
death to innocent victims. But does this risk not exist in every aspect of life? While this is a
legitimate possible consequence, the benefit of increased confidence in therapist-client
confidentiality far outweighs the hypothetical victim count. Clients who struggle to be open will
have the peace of mind that their communication in sessions is truly between them and their
therapist, resulting in more honesty and vulnerability. Therapists will be more relaxed knowing
that they can make these professional judgments to the best of their abilities without
consequence. The overall practice can only improve if Herbert’s suggestion is implemented.
Consider the immeasurable impact this will have on the therapeutic experience of countless
clients, now and in the future.
Sara Alexander
References
Herbert, P. (2002). The duty to warn: A reconsideration and critique. Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 30(3), 417-420.
Lens, V. (2000). Protecting the confidentiality of the therapeutic relationship: Jaffe vs. Redmond.
Social Work, 45(3), 273-276.
**## DUTYTOWARN.docx**
In this module you have been learning about a social worker's duties to warn, focusing on the Jaffe v. Redmond case, and to maintain confidentiality, focusing on the Tarasoff case, and under what kinds of circumstances those duties can be violated. Generally, our Code of Ethics explains that social workers must maintain these duties unless an individual is a threat to themselves or others.
Herbert (2002, p. 423) has made suggestions for different rules regarding the duty to warn: "A psychotherapist
**may** warn a third party threatened explicitly or implicitly with physical harm by a patient, directly and/or by notifying the police,
**but need not, and is immune from civil liability under either election**."
For this assignment, you will take on the role of an advocate. In social work practice, advocacy comes in many different forms. One of the ways in which social workers advocate is by bringing significant issues to the attention of supervisors, boards of directors, administrators, and others who have power to institute changes if they see fit to do so. Often, social workers have limited time (oral reports) or space (written reports) to make impactful statements. For this assignment, you will have the experience of writing a 'white paper. (See the below box Writing a White Paper for specific instructions on how to do so.)
The white paper you will be writing has the aim of convincing a non-profit social work agency's board of directors that your informed opinion about a social worker's duty to warn is correct. You will need to decide which guidelines for a social worker's duty to warn are the most ethically correct: the guidelines put forth by the Tarasoff decision, or Herbert's proposed guidelines. In order to compose your white paper, you will need to address the below points briefly, specifically, and convincingly.
1. How are the current duty to warn rules (based on the Tarasoff decision) different from Herbert’s proposed rules?
2. In your informed opinion based on this Module's readings, are Herbert's (2002) suggested rules that contain more leeway better than the current duty to warn rules? Why or why not?
3.
**_Tarasoff Big Idea Question_:** What do you believe would be the intended and unintended consequences for social workers and social work practice if Herbert’s (2002) suggested rules regarding the duty to warn were instituted in place of the current rules that are based on the Tarasoff decision?
4.
According to
Cullen (2018, para. 2),
Links to an external site.
"A white paper is an authoritative document intended to fully inform the reader on a particular topic. It combines expert knowledge and research into a document that argues for a specific solution or recommendation. The white paper allows the reader to understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision."
White papers have catchy titles like
_Out With the Old Tarasoff and In With the New Herbert._ (Well, maybe that one isn't so catchy, but you get the idea.) They are chock full of solid information and do not have any flowery or extra language or wording. They are clear, specific, concise, and informative. White papers seek to convince the readers that the paper's subject is the best option.
[Module 14 Assignment Example – White Paper Herbert vs. Tarasoff.pdf](https://uk.instructure.com/courses/2128661/files/112317035?wrap=1)
**Specifications for Your White Paper**
**Length:** Your white paper must be a
minimum of one full page (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font with regular margins) and
no longer than two pages in length. Remember that social workers often have small allotments of space for advocacy!
**Format:** Put your name in the header so that it does not take up any of the lines of text on the page. No title page is required. Include a References page and corresponding in-text citations. The References page does not count toward the length of the paper.
**Clarity:** Use correct grammar, wording, sentence structure, and correct basic writing skills. Be convincing! Be specific! Remember, you have a maximum of two pages to get your points across!
**Academic Integrity:** Use your own words in this white paper. Do not use direct quotes in this assignment. Paraphrase fully to demonstrate your understanding of the required content. Please cite all information that comes from sources—but ensure that you have paraphrased the ideas fully. Please consult resources if you are unsure how to go about paraphrasing completely. This assignment will be checked for plagiarism when it is turned in.
**## DUTYTOWARN.docx**
In this module you have been learning about a social worker's duties to warn, focusing on the Jaffe v. Redmond case, and to maintain confidentiality, focusing on the Tarasoff case, and under what kinds of circumstances those duties can be violated. Generally, our Code of Ethics explains that social workers must maintain these duties unless an individual is a threat to themselves or others.
Herbert (2002, p. 423) has made suggestions for different rules regarding the duty to warn: "A psychotherapist
**may** warn a third party threatened explicitly or implicitly with physical harm by a patient, directly and/or by notifying the police,
**but need not, and is immune from civil liability under either election**."
For this assignment, you will take on the role of an advocate. In social work practice, advocacy comes in many different forms. One of the ways in which social workers advocate is by bringing significant issues to the attention of supervisors, boards of directors, administrators, and others who have power to institute changes if they see fit to do so. Often, social workers have limited time (oral reports) or space (written reports) to make impactful statements. For this assignment, you will have the experience of writing a 'white paper. (See the below box Writing a White Paper for specific instructions on how to do so.)
The white paper you will be writing has the aim of convincing a non-profit social work agency's board of directors that your informed opinion about a social worker's duty to warn is correct. You will need to decide which guidelines for a social worker's duty to warn are the most ethically correct: the guidelines put forth by the Tarasoff decision, or Herbert's proposed guidelines. In order to compose your white paper, you will need to address the below points briefly, specifically, and convincingly.
1. How are the current duty to warn rules (based on the Tarasoff decision) different from Herbert’s proposed rules?
2. In your informed opinion based on this Module's readings, are Herbert's (2002) suggested rules that contain more leeway better than the current duty to warn rules? Why or why not?
3.
**_Tarasoff Big Idea Question_:** What do you believe would be the intended and unintended consequences for social workers and social work practice if Herbert’s (2002) suggested rules regarding the duty to warn were instituted in place of the current rules that are based on the Tarasoff decision?
4.
According to
Cullen (2018, para. 2),
Links to an external site.
"A white paper is an authoritative document intended to fully inform the reader on a particular topic. It combines expert knowledge and research into a document that argues for a specific solution or recommendation. The white paper allows the reader to understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision."
White papers have catchy titles like
_Out With the Old Tarasoff and In With the New Herbert._ (Well, maybe that one isn't so catchy, but you get the idea.) They are chock full of solid information and do not have any flowery or extra language or wording. They are clear, specific, concise, and informative. White papers seek to convince the readers that the paper's subject is the best option.
[Module 14 Assignment Example – White Paper Herbert vs. Tarasoff.pdf](https://uk.instructure.com/courses/2128661/files/112317035?wrap=1)
**Specifications for Your White Paper**
**Length:** Your white paper must be a
minimum of one full page (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font with regular margins) and
no longer than two pages in length. Remember that social workers often have small allotments of space for advocacy!
**Format:** Put your name in the header so that it does not take up any of the lines of text on the page. No title page is required. Include a References page and corresponding in-text citations. The References page does not count toward the length of the paper.
**Clarity:** Use correct grammar, wording, sentence structure, and correct basic writing skills. Be convincing! Be specific! Remember, you have a maximum of two pages to get your points across!
**Academic Integrity:** Use your own words in this white paper. Do not use direct quotes in this assignment. Paraphrase fully to demonstrate your understanding of the required content. Please cite all information that comes from sources—but ensure that you have paraphrased the ideas fully. Please consult resources if you are unsure how to go about paraphrasing completely. This assignment will be checked for plagiarism when it is turned in.
**## Module14AssignmentExample-WhitePaperHerbertvs.Tarasoff.pdf**
Sara Alexander
Herbert We Get Rid of This Taras-Awful Rule?
The infamous “Tarasoff duty”, decided during the landmark case, Tarasoff v. The
Regents of the University of California deemed it mandatory for a psychotherapist to warn and
protect an intended victim against danger if they perceived their client as a threat to said victim
(Herbert, 2002). Ventura psychiatrist Dr. Paul Herbert (2002) suggests an adjustment to the
language which would allow the therapist to decide if and when it is appropriate to warn the
victim. His suggestion is to make it clear that a therapist can warn, but is not required to, nor can
be held civilly liable.
As reflected in the 1996 Supreme Court case, Jaffee v. Redmond, therapy to support
mental health is an essential component of American citizens’ overall health (Lens, 2000) and
thus rules and laws affecting the delivery of this public good deserve thoughtfulness and careful
consideration. Holding therapists liable for not warning a potential victim of danger significantly
impairs the quality of care they are able to give. Confidentiality is essential in a therapist-client
relationship. Taking away the assurance that the client’s words will only be heard by the
therapist creates a barrier to their willingness to be open, truthful, and vulnerable, compromising
the effectiveness of the therapy. Additionally, what justification is there for requiring this duty in
these specific circumstances? Should a friend or coach be held liable in the same way? The
argument that it is due to the nature of the professional relationship does not stand. Therapists do
not possess some supernatural skill to predict a client’s violent potential. While training and
assessments exist, they are not computer algorithms. Holding a therapist liable to make this
judgment correctly is preposterous. Because of the complex nature of working with humans and
the high potential for error, Herbert’s suggested shift in language, protecting the therapist from
liability and allowing them to make their best judgment without fear of retribution, is the only
Sara Alexander
appropriate option.
There may be a concern that this shift in language will result in violence and potential
death to innocent victims. But does this risk not exist in every aspect of life? While this is a
legitimate possible consequence, the benefit of increased confidence in therapist-client
confidentiality far outweighs the hypothetical victim count. Clients who struggle to be open will
have the peace of mind that their communication in sessions is truly between them and their
therapist, resulting in more honesty and vulnerability. Therapists will be more relaxed knowing
that they can make these professional judgments to the best of their abilities without
consequence. The overall practice can only improve if Herbert’s suggestion is implemented.
Consider the immeasurable impact this will have on the therapeutic experience of countless
clients, now and in the future.
Sara Alexander
References
Herbert, P. (2002). The duty to warn: A reconsideration and critique. Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 30(3), 417-420.
Lens, V. (2000). Protecting the confidentiality of the therapeutic relationship: Jaffe vs. Redmond.
Social Work, 45(3), 273-276.
**## DUTYTOWARN.docx**
In this module you have been learning about a social worker's duties to warn, focusing on the Jaffe v. Redmond case, and to maintain confidentiality, focusing on the Tarasoff case, and under what kinds of circumstances those duties can be violated. Generally, our Code of Ethics explains that social workers must maintain these duties unless an individual is a threat to themselves or others.
Herbert (2002, p. 423) has made suggestions for different rules regarding the duty to warn: "A psychotherapist
**may** warn a third party threatened explicitly or implicitly with physical harm by a patient, directly and/or by notifying the police,
**but need not, and is immune from civil liability under either election**."
For this assignment, you will take on the role of an advocate. In social work practice, advocacy comes in many different forms. One of the ways in which social workers advocate is by bringing significant issues to the attention of supervisors, boards of directors, administrators, and others who have power to institute changes if they see fit to do so. Often, social workers have limited time (oral reports) or space (written reports) to make impactful statements. For this assignment, you will have the experience of writing a 'white paper. (See the below box Writing a White Paper for specific instructions on how to do so.)
The white paper you will be writing has the aim of convincing a non-profit social work agency's board of directors that your informed opinion about a social worker's duty to warn is correct. You will need to decide which guidelines for a social worker's duty to warn are the most ethically correct: the guidelines put forth by the Tarasoff decision, or Herbert's proposed guidelines. In order to compose your white paper, you will need to address the below points briefly, specifically, and convincingly.
1. How are the current duty to warn rules (based on the Tarasoff decision) different from Herbert’s proposed rules?
2. In your informed opinion based on this Module's readings, are Herbert's (2002) suggested rules that contain more leeway better than the current duty to warn rules? Why or why not?
3.
**_Tarasoff Big Idea Question_:** What do you believe would be the intended and unintended consequences for social workers and social work practice if Herbert’s (2002) suggested rules regarding the duty to warn were instituted in place of the current rules that are based on the Tarasoff decision?
4.
According to
Cullen (2018, para. 2),
Links to an external site.
"A white paper is an authoritative document intended to fully inform the reader on a particular topic. It combines expert knowledge and research into a document that argues for a specific solution or recommendation. The white paper allows the reader to understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision."
White papers have catchy titles like
_Out With the Old Tarasoff and In With the New Herbert._ (Well, maybe that one isn't so catchy, but you get the idea.) They are chock full of solid information and do not have any flowery or extra language or wording. They are clear, specific, concise, and informative. White papers seek to convince the readers that the paper's subject is the best option.
[Module 14 Assignment Example – White Paper Herbert vs. Tarasoff.pdf](https://uk.instructure.com/courses/2128661/files/112317035?wrap=1)
**Specifications for Your White Paper**
**Length:** Your white paper must be a
minimum of one full page (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font with regular margins) and
no longer than two pages in length. Remember that social workers often have small allotments of space for advocacy!
**Format:** Put your name in the header so that it does not take up any of the lines of text on the page. No title page is required. Include a References page and corresponding in-text citations. The References page does not count toward the length of the paper.
**Clarity:** Use correct grammar, wording, sentence structure, and correct basic writing skills. Be convincing! Be specific! Remember, you have a maximum of two pages to get your points across!
**Academic Integrity:** Use your own words in this white paper. Do not use direct quotes in this assignment. Paraphrase fully to demonstrate your understanding of the required content. Please cite all information that comes from sources—but ensure that you have paraphrased the ideas fully. Please consult resources if you are unsure how to go about paraphrasing completely. This assignment will be checked for plagiarism when it is turned in.
**## Module14AssignmentExample-WhitePaperHerbertvs.Tarasoff.pdf**
Sara Alexander
Herbert We Get Rid of This Taras-Awful Rule?
The infamous “Tarasoff duty”, decided during the landmark case, Tarasoff v. The
Regents of the University of California deemed it mandatory for a psychotherapist to warn and
protect an intended victim against danger if they perceived their client as a threat to said victim
(Herbert, 2002). Ventura psychiatrist Dr. Paul Herbert (2002) suggests an adjustment to the
language which would allow the therapist to decide if and when it is appropriate to warn the
victim. His suggestion is to make it clear that a therapist can warn, but is not required to, nor can
be held civilly liable.
As reflected in the 1996 Supreme Court case, Jaffee v. Redmond, therapy to support
mental health is an essential component of American citizens’ overall health (Lens, 2000) and
thus rules and laws affecting the delivery of this public good deserve thoughtfulness and careful
consideration. Holding therapists liable for not warning a potential victim of danger significantly
impairs the quality of care they are able to give. Confidentiality is essential in a therapist-client
relationship. Taking away the assurance that the client’s words will only be heard by the
therapist creates a barrier to their willingness to be open, truthful, and vulnerable, compromising
the effectiveness of the therapy. Additionally, what justification is there for requiring this duty in
these specific circumstances? Should a friend or coach be held liable in the same way? The
argument that it is due to the nature of the professional relationship does not stand. Therapists do
not possess some supernatural skill to predict a client’s violent potential. While training and
assessments exist, they are not computer algorithms. Holding a therapist liable to make this
judgment correctly is preposterous. Because of the complex nature of working with humans and
the high potential for error, Herbert’s suggested shift in language, protecting the therapist from
liability and allowing them to make their best judgment without fear of retribution, is the only
Sara Alexander
appropriate option.
There may be a concern that this shift in language will result in violence and potential
death to innocent victims. But does this risk not exist in every aspect of life? While this is a
legitimate possible consequence, the benefit of increased confidence in therapist-client
confidentiality far outweighs the hypothetical victim count. Clients who struggle to be open will
have the peace of mind that their communication in sessions is truly between them and their
therapist, resulting in more honesty and vulnerability. Therapists will be more relaxed knowing
that they can make these professional judgments to the best of their abilities without
consequence. The overall practice can only improve if Herbert’s suggestion is implemented.
Consider the immeasurable impact this will have on the therapeutic experience of countless
clients, now and in the future.
Sara Alexander
References
Herbert, P. (2002). The duty to warn: A reconsideration and critique. Journal of the American
Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 30(3), 417-420.
Lens, V. (2000). Protecting the confidentiality of the therapeutic relationship: Jaffe vs. Redmond.
Social Work, 45(3), 273-276.
**## DUTYTOWARN.docx**
In this module you have been learning about a social worker's duties to warn, focusing on the Jaffe v. Redmond case, and to maintain confidentiality, focusing on the Tarasoff case, and under what kinds of circumstances those duties can be violated. Generally, our Code of Ethics explains that social workers must maintain these duties unless an individual is a threat to themselves or others.
Herbert (2002, p. 423) has made suggestions for different rules regarding the duty to warn: "A psychotherapist
**may** warn a third party threatened explicitly or implicitly with physical harm by a patient, directly and/or by notifying the police,
**but need not, and is immune from civil liability under either election**."
For this assignment, you will take on the role of an advocate. In social work practice, advocacy comes in many different forms. One of the ways in which social workers advocate is by bringing significant issues to the attention of supervisors, boards of directors, administrators, and others who have power to institute changes if they see fit to do so. Often, social workers have limited time (oral reports) or space (written reports) to make impactful statements. For this assignment, you will have the experience of writing a 'white paper. (See the below box Writing a White Paper for specific instructions on how to do so.)
The white paper you will be writing has the aim of convincing a non-profit social work agency's board of directors that your informed opinion about a social worker's duty to warn is correct. You will need to decide which guidelines for a social worker's duty to warn are the most ethically correct: the guidelines put forth by the Tarasoff decision, or Herbert's proposed guidelines. In order to compose your white paper, you will need to address the below points briefly, specifically, and convincingly.
1. How are the current duty to warn rules (based on the Tarasoff decision) different from Herbert’s proposed rules?
2. In your informed opinion based on this Module's readings, are Herbert's (2002) suggested rules that contain more leeway better than the current duty to warn rules? Why or why not?
3.
**_Tarasoff Big Idea Question_:** What do you believe would be the intended and unintended consequences for social workers and social work practice if Herbert’s (2002) suggested rules regarding the duty to warn were instituted in place of the current rules that are based on the Tarasoff decision?
4.
According to
Cullen (2018, para. 2),
Links to an external site.
"A white paper is an authoritative document intended to fully inform the reader on a particular topic. It combines expert knowledge and research into a document that argues for a specific solution or recommendation. The white paper allows the reader to understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a decision."
White papers have catchy titles like
_Out With the Old Tarasoff and In With the New Herbert._ (Well, maybe that one isn't so catchy, but you get the idea.) They are chock full of solid information and do not have any flowery or extra language or wording. They are clear, specific, concise, and informative. White papers seek to convince the readers that the paper's subject is the best option.
[Module 14 Assignment Example – White Paper Herbert vs. Tarasoff.pdf](https://uk.instructure.com/courses/2128661/files/112317035?wrap=1)
**Specifications for Your White Paper**
**Length:** Your white paper must be a
minimum of one full page (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font with regular margins) and
no longer than two pages in length. Remember that social workers often have small allotments of space for advocacy!
**Format:** Put your name in the header so that it does not take up any of the lines of text on the page. No title page is required. Include a References page and corresponding in-text citations. The References page does not count toward the length of the paper.
**Clarity:** Use correct grammar, wording, sentence structure, and correct basic writing skills. Be convincing! Be specific! Remember, you have a maximum of two pages to get your points across!
**Academic Integrity:** Use your own words in this white paper. Do not use direct quotes in this assignment. Paraphrase fully to demonstrate your understanding of the required content. Please cite all information that comes from sources—but ensure that you have paraphrased the ideas fully. Please consult resources if you are unsure how to go about paraphrasing completely. This assignment will be checked for plagiarism when it is turned in.