Duty to warnThere are many ethical practices that are advocated in all professions around the world. This ethic is meant to promote integrity and also ensure that the profession in question does not violate the rights of any parties who may participate in it. The most common example that almost everyone is familiar with is “doctor-patient confidentiality.” Other professions also have their own codes of ethics, intended to safeguard the interests of the parties involved without infringing on individual freedoms. However, many scenarios have caused physicians and other professions to feel the need to share useful information with other parties (Stone, 1985). This is even more true when it comes to the well-being of a patient or other potential victims. This research paper defends the “duty to warn” ideology. The Tarasoff case showed the need to warn authorities about potentially dangerous personnel, although the case sparked controversy over doctor-patient confidentiality. The case involved two students at the University of California, Berkley in 1969. It was after the murder of a student, Prosenjit Poddar, with a kitchen knife. The two had met at a folk dance class a year earlier and ended up kissing on New Year's Eve 1969. This kiss convinced Poddar that they were in a serious relationship, but when Tarasoff informed that they were not and that in fact she was dating other men, he vowed to kill her (Walcott et al, 2001). He even told one of his friends that he planned to blow it up in his room. In addition to this, he neglected his health and studies due to depression. His friend managed to convince him to seek therapy and he began seeing Dr. Moore, ...... middle of paper ...... of the majority should always be protected if an individual is having problems with health or others. of danger to lives other than his own. This is the same perspective as that defended by the “duty to warn” ideology. Physicians have a duty to notify responsible agencies of potential victims. In fact, after California adopted this directive, other states adopted the idea, although South Carolina, Florida, Virginia, and Texas continue to reject it.ReferencesRosner, F. (2007). Contemporary biomedical ethical problems and Jewish law. Jersey City, NJ: KTAV Pub. House. Walcott, D. Cerundolo, P. Beck, J. C. and Allan, F. (2001). Current analysis of the Tarasoff duty: An evolution towards the limitation of the duty to protect. Behavioral science and law. 19 (3): 325-343. Stone, A. A. (1985). Law, psychiatry and morality: essays and analyses. Sl: Amer Psychiatric.