What is the impact described in Ewing v. Goldstein regarding clinicians' duties?

Prepare for the LPCC Law and Ethics Test 2. Use flashcards and multiple-choice questions with explanations. Enhance your understanding of ethics and legal standards for effective counseling practice.

Multiple Choice

What is the impact described in Ewing v. Goldstein regarding clinicians' duties?

The key idea is that the duty to warn or protect expands when someone close to the patient—often a family member—tells the clinician that the patient is dangerous to others. Ewing v. Goldstein recognizes that credible information about a patient’s dangerousness coming from an immediate family member can create a responsibility to take protective action or warn the potential victim, even if the patient hasn’t directly stated the threat to the clinician. This broadens the circumstances under which clinicians must intervene to prevent harm, beyond threats the patient communicates directly to the clinician. It doesn’t narrow the duty, it doesn’t say there’s no effect, and it isn’t limited to threats spoken by the patient alone.

The key idea is that the duty to warn or protect expands when someone close to the patient—often a family member—tells the clinician that the patient is dangerous to others. Ewing v. Goldstein recognizes that credible information about a patient’s dangerousness coming from an immediate family member can create a responsibility to take protective action or warn the potential victim, even if the patient hasn’t directly stated the threat to the clinician. This broadens the circumstances under which clinicians must intervene to prevent harm, beyond threats the patient communicates directly to the clinician. It doesn’t narrow the duty, it doesn’t say there’s no effect, and it isn’t limited to threats spoken by the patient alone.

More practice questions