Tarasoff v. Regents established that clinicians may disclose patient information to warn potential victims when the patient poses what?

• A. The patient poses a serious danger of violence to others
• B. The patient requests confidentiality be waived
• C. The patient is a minor
• D. The patient consents to disclosure

Answer: (A)

This item tests the duty to warn. Confidentiality isn’t absolute—if a patient poses a serious danger of violence to others, clinicians may disclose information to warn identifiable potential victims or take steps to protect them. Tarasoff established that when there’s a credible threat of serious harm, the clinician’s obligation shifts from preserving secrecy to preventing harm, which may involve warning the potential victim or notifying authorities. The threshold is about real, serious risk to others, not about consent, being a minor, or a request to waive confidentiality. That’s why warning potential victims is the appropriate, legally recognized exception.