The case of Tarasoff was pivotal in establishing the rule that social service workers have a confidentiality agreement and consent papers to provide to their clients. In the case a therapist was informed by his client that he was going to harm a young lady when she finally returned back from the vacation she took. The therapist felt that this was a real problem and notified the proper chain of command. Which would be the supervisors, and the campus police who then took the gentleman into custody and concluded that he was not going to be a danger for anyone. Later he ended up killing the young lady and her family sued all of the workers involved. Then, the courts ruled that they were all held accountable due to the fact that they did not warn the third-party and protect them from the harm that was threatened. They felt that even though it would have been a break of confidentiality between the therapist and his client that he was responsible to also protect her. “The courts feel that all third parties should when a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger" (Kagle & Kopel, 1994). When a client comes to a social worker for help they expect a line of comfort and trust between them. A therapist is a person they feel safe to confide in and are obviously there for reasons that they need to work something out. Therapist are provided with tools and education to handle most situations. Yet before Tarasoff there wasn’t really anything in place that protected the third party if the time came. Now there is a list that, depending on the state, we must follow and observe to see if the threat that is proposed is indeed one that needs to be reported. Once, a client finally meets with the therapist there are papers that are required to be fill