The DOI matches its Crossref record.
From posts to protection: Ethical considerations regarding forensic psychiatrists and a duty to warn based on social media
Open accessAbstract
Increasing use of social media in forensic mental health evaluations will lead to new challenges that must be resolved by forensic practitioners and the legal system. One such dilemma is the discovery of information that would typically trigger a legal duty and professional ethics obligation for mental health professionals to breach doctor‐patient confidentiality to promote public safety and prevent harm to vulnerable third parties. Although the law and professional organizations offer clear guidance for practitioners in the treatment role, there is currently no clarity from the law or instruction from professional organizations on what mental health professionals should do if they discover such information during a confidential forensic evaluation. For example, a forensic evaluator may find evidence on social media of an evaluee’s threats to seriously harm others, abuse of children and the elderly, or severely impaired driving. There are no clear guidelines for how a forensic psychiatrist should respond in these complicated situations. We review the legal concepts and historical evolution of confidentiality, privilege, and mandated reporter duties that forensic practitioners should consider in these legally ambiguous situations. Finally, we discuss ethics frameworks practitioners can implement to determine their most ethical course of action when faced with such dilemmas.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Clearer guidance around breaching confidentiality may be warranted, especially in cases where perpetrators continue to engage in technology-facilitated abuse with limited regulation or accountability from SM platforms, in an attempt to prevent further harm to targeted adolescents (128).”
From A thematic analysis of adolescents’ perceptions of cyberbullying and cyberaggression: definitional distinctions and educational gaps (2026) · cites this paper as [128]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- 10.1176/appi.focus.20190021 · DOI
- Appelbaum P. S., 1997, A theory of ethics for forensic psychiatry, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 25, 233
- 10.1080/14999013.2021.1880504 · DOI
- Beauchamp T. L., 2013, Principles of biomedical ethics (seventh)
- 10.1046/j.1525‐1497.2000.04309.x · DOI
- Candilis P. J., 2001, Principles and narrative in forensic psychiatry: Toward a robust view of professional role, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 29, 167
- Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2019, Mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect
- Cleveland v, 2022, Taft union high Sch. Dist., No. F080084 (cal. Ct, App. Mar., 25
- 10.29158/JAAPL.003940‐20 · DOI
- 10.1037/pro0000206 · DOI
- 10.29158/JAAPL.210152‐21 · DOI
- 10.2174/2210676608666180112141022 · DOI
- 10.1176/appi.focus.20180020 · DOI
- Fliszar G. M., 2000, Dangerousness and the duty to warn, Emerich v. Philadelphia center for human development, Inc. brings Tarasoff to Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh law review, 201
- 10.1176/appi.focus.17401 · DOI
- Griffith E. E. H., 1998, Ethics in forensic psychiatry: A cultural response to stone and Appelbaum, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 26, 171
- Gutheil T. G., 2010, Commentary: Tarasoff duties arising from a forensic independent medical examination, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 38, 57
- 10.1176/appi.focus.17402 · DOI
- 10.1177/00938548211042057 · DOI
- 10.2139/ssrn.1470849 · DOI
- 10.29158/JAAPL.003911‐20 · DOI
- 10.1097/NMD.0000000000001297 · DOI
- Nguyen v. MIT. (2018). 96 N.E. 3d 128. Mass.. · DOI
- Norko M. A., 2005, Commentary: Compassion at the core of forensic ethics, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 33, 386
- O’Shaughnessy R. J., 1999, Canadian landmark case, smith v. Jones, Supreme court of Canada: Confidentiality and privilege suffer another blow, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law Online, 27, 614
- 10.1037/pro0000061 · DOI
- 10.1370/afm.575 · DOI
- 10.2307/1340158 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpubh.2021.752004 · DOI
- Weinstock R., 2015, Dialectical principlism: An approach to finding the most ethical action, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 43, 10
- Weinstock R., 2014, No duty to warn in California: Now unambiguously solely a duty to protect, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 42, 101
- Weinstock R., 2006, Back to the past in California: A temporary retreat to a tarasoff duty to warn, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 34, 523
- Zenor J., 2021, If you see something, say something: Can artificial intelligence have a duty to report dangerous behavior in the home?, Denver Law Review, 98, 839
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Smith, E. J., Rai, R., Scase, M. O., & Wilson, A. D. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1746672
Metadata
- Authors
- MacIntyre, M. R., Sones, A. C., Li, J., Darby, W. C., & Weinstock, R.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- MacIntyre, Michael R.
- Venue
- Behavioral Sciences & the Law
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-02-22
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 130-148
- ISSN
- 0735-3936 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0798
- OpenAlex
- W4392108475
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4
- FWCI
- 0.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Behavioral Sciences & the Law (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
- Social Sciences › Law › Medical and Health Sciences Research
- Keywords
- forensic psychiatry, social media, duty to warn, confidentiality, professional ethics, mandatory reporting, privilege, public safety, forensic psychiatric assessment, ethics framework, child abuse, elder abuse, impaired driving
- MeSH terms
- Psychiatrists, Aged, Child, Child Abuse, Confidentiality, Forensic Psychiatry, Humans, Duty to Warn, Social Media
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: From posts to protection: Ethical considerations regarding forensic psychiatrists and a duty to warn based on social media. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bsl.2647
- The paper
- MacIntyre, M. R., Sones, A. C., Li, J., Darby, W. C., & Weinstock, R. (2024). From posts to protection: Ethical considerations regarding forensic psychiatrists and a duty to warn based on social media. Behavioral Sciences & the Law. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2647