Psychotherapists are required in many states to inform police when the client makes a credible threat of violence against an identifiable victim.
In the landmark case of
Tarasoff
v. Regents of University of California, the California Supreme Court held that the special relationship between a psychotherapist and a patient imposes on the therapist a duty to act reasonably to protect the foreseeable victims of a patient.
Some courts have limited this rule to cases where the patient makes a threat against a specific person. Many courts have held that a therapist is not required to call the police when the patient makes a generalized threat of violence against society. These courts reasoned that when a threat is generalized, there is no meaningful way for the therapist to warn society at large.
The psychiatrist cannot take any action against the technician
If the service member reported the inappropriate disclosure to the proper authorities, what likely action may be taken against the psychiatrist if found guilty?
The psychiatrist cannot take any action against the technician
Under HIPPA, the psychiatrist will get a fine of $50,000, one year in prison or both.
No action may be taken against the technician in accordance with HIPAA's policy of non-retaliation against whistleblower.
The government threatened to impose austerity measures..
britain
The government threatened to impose austerity measures..
Under HIPPA, the psychiatrist would get a fine of up to $50,000 or up to one year in prison, or both.
Under HIPPA, the psychiatrist would get a fine of up to $50,000 or up to one year in prison, or both.
The only way is by turning yourself in to law enforcement and facing and defending yourself against the charges against you.
The émigrés threatened France because they were the ones plotting against the Revolutionary Government.