IN THE 1974 CASE OF TARASOFF V. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET AL, THE COURT RULES THAT PSYCHOTHERAPISTS ARE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES IF THEY FAIL TO WARN A THIRD PARTY OF A THREAT BY THEIR PATIENT, AND THE PATIENT CARRIES OUT THE THREAT. IN THE TARASOFF CASE, A STUDENT KILLED ANOTHER PERSON AFTER CONFIDING HIS INTENTION TO DO SO 2 MONTHS EARLIER TO A PSYCHOLOGIST EMPLOYED BY THE UNIVERSITY. THE PSYCHOLOGIST HAD ASKED THE CAMPUS POLICE TO DETAIN THE STUDENT BUT HE HAD BEEN RELEASED WHEN HE APPEARED TO BE RATIONAL. THE PSYCHOLOGIST'S SUPERIOR HAD DIRECTED THAT NO FURTHER DETAINMENT TAKE PLACE. CASE EXAMPLES FROM OTHER STATES ILLUSTRATE THE DIFFICULTY IN DEFINING THE CONCEPT OF DANGEROUSNESS. THE CALIFORNIA COURT HAS INCORRECTLY ASSUMED THAT MENTAL HEALTH WORKERS CAN ACCURATELY PREDICT VIOLENT BEHAVIOR AND HAVE ESTABLISHED CLEAR PREDICTORS OF SUCH BEHAVIOR. IN FACT, ANALYSIS OF PSYCHOTHERAPISTS' ABILITY, TRAINING, AND THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THEY ARE NOT EXPERTS IN THIS AREA. MOREOVER, THE COURT'S RULING WILL REDUCE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN THERAPY, WILL INCREASE THE ALREADY LARGE NUMBER OF INCORRECT PREDICTIONS OF THERAPISTS, AND WILL CAUSE PSYCHOTHERAPY TO BE IDENTIFIED WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT. BY INFRINGING ON CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE CLIENT-THERAPIST RELATIONSHIP, THE COURT HAS REDUCED THERAPY'S EFFECTIVENESS IN PREVENTING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND WILL DETER POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS INDIVIDUALS FROM SEEKING HELP. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)