This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Steven E. Hyman, MD
Massachusetts General Hospital East Charlestown, Mass

JAMA. 1996;275(1):32-33.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—The letter by Drs Zenilman, Rompalo, and Jadack highlights several important issues that were discussed in our Clinical Crossroads article. Zenilman and colleagues raise the issue of a physician's "duty to warn" potential victims of future harm, a duty enshrined in the Tarasoff case.¹ The problem with respect to the patient under discussion is that to warn potential victims, the clinician must know their identities. In this case, we cannot predict who the patient's future sexual partners will be. Short of successful treatment, the clinician cannot protect or warn society at large, except by incarcerating the patient or perhaps forcing him to wear a warning label. Such measures have not been adopted by American society. Indeed, American society has, by and large, limited the paternalistic powers that physicians have. Only in limited circumstances, such as the mentally ill individual who poses an immediate risk to self or . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?