This would be determined by the laws of the particular state.
I don't belief that Minnesota has any Tarasoff legislation per se; the
determination would be based on case law.
At 8:30 PM -0500 4/7/99, Peter & Carole Lawson wrote:
>At 04:02 PM 4/7/99 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>We were discussing some ethical issues in counseling today in my course
>>on close relationships, and a student asked whether a counselor who
>>learned that one member of a couple had been infected by HIV would be
>>ethically obligated to tell the other partner of the infection.
>>
>I believe the Tarasoff decision would apply here. The counselor is legally
>bound to inform any person who is potentially in danger from a client where
>there is a reasonable, or in this case, great probability that the person
>will be harmed. I wait other replies, but to me this looks like a "no
>brainer." (Maybe, though, I'm the one without?)
>
>
>Peter Lawson, Ph.D.
>Psychology Department
>Century College
>White Bear Lake, MN 55110
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Department 507-389-6217 *
* "The University formerly known as Mankato State" *
* http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
