California Law and Ethics Practice Exam

What kind of immunity do psychotherapists have in cases of breaching confidentiality to warn a potential victim?

1. No immunity under any circumstance

2. Immunity from monetary liability

3. Immunity from criminal charges

4. Limited immunity to specific situations

The correct answer is: Immunity from monetary liability

The correct understanding is that psychotherapists have limited immunity from monetary liability when breaching confidentiality to warn a potential victim. This concept is rooted in the ethical and legal responsibilities of mental health professionals to protect individuals from harm. In California, there are certain conditions under which psychotherapists are mandated to breach confidentiality if they believe that their client poses a serious risk of harm to an identified victim or a group of people. The law recognizes that the duty to protect potential victims can sometimes override the obligation to maintain client confidentiality. Thus, if a psychotherapist makes a disclosure in good faith based on the belief that there is an imminent threat, they may be protected from financial repercussions that could arise from such a breach. This limited immunity incentivizes therapists to act in the interest of public safety while still adhering to their professional and ethical duties. The other options do not accurately reflect the nuances of the legal protections available to therapists in these cases. For instance, stating that there is no immunity under any circumstance overlooks the protective measures designed to encourage therapists to take necessary actions to prevent harm. Similarly, the notion of immunity from criminal charges does not apply broadly, as breaches of confidentiality could lead to legal action in specific contexts. Therefore, recognizing the limited immunity related to monetary liability