The Psychotherapist's Duty to Protect the Public: The Appropriate Standard and the Foundation in Legal Theory and Empirical Premises

Authors

Robert F. Schopp, University of Nebraska College of LawFollow

Abstract

I. Introduction

II. Schuster and Hamman ... A. Schuster v. Altenberg ... B. Hamman v. County of Maricopa ... C. The Common Foundation of Schuster and Hamman

III. Previous Cases ... A. STIV [specific threats toward identifiable victims] Cases ... B. ZOD [zone of danger] Cases ... C. Comparison of STIV Cases with Earlier ZOD Cases

IV. Analysis ... A. The Duty to Protect and the Duty to Warn ... B. Determined or Should Have Determined ... C. The ZOD Standard as Self-Defeating

V. Summary and Conclusions

Recommended Citation

Robert F. Schopp, The Psychotherapist's Duty to Protect the Public: The Appropriate Standard and the Foundation in Legal Theory and Empirical Premises, 70 Neb. L. Rev. (1991)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol70/iss2/8