Legal and Ethical Issues for CA MFT Licensing Exam

- Hedlund v. Superior Court of Orange County (1983)
- Decided that the holdings of the Tarasoff Decision are extended to include liability to close relatives and foreseeable bystanders

- 1978
- Decided that the holdings of Tarasoff Decision do NOT apply to threats against self and property
- Clarified that a therapist's duty is to take reasonable steps to prevent suicide

- 12 or older
- Only outpatient or residential shelter
- Minor must be mature enough to participate intelligently (in the opinion of the therapist)
- Minor must present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to self or others without treatment or must be an alleged victim of incest or abuse

A person under 18 who is
1) married
2) in active duty with armed forces
or 3) declared emancipated from a court

- NOT legally responsible for reporting
- Ethically responsible to provide safety (i.e. help of family/friends, hospitalization)

- 1976
- If reasonable suspicion of child abuse is not reported, the therapist is open to civil liability for a 3-year period once the abused minor reaches age of majority

Therapist has a "right" to warn when property is threatened

- 1972
- Clarified that in order for Tarasoff to apply, the victim must be identifiable and peril must be foreseeable
- In other words, the holdings of the Tarasoff Decision do not apply to non-specific threats made against non-specific individuals

Administrative hearing with an administrative judge

Stipulated agreement

- Administrative cases
- i.e. only uses initials, not full names

MAY be revealed only if it helps to determine the best interest of the child

- Individual is the client
- Client is entitled to a confidential relationship

- Court is the client
- Individual is NOT entitled to a confidential relationship

1 spouse must have CA state residence for a least 6 months