Mandated Reporting, Duty to Protect, and Responses to Subpoenas and Court Orders
Core concepts
Arkansas law requires mandated reporting of suspected child maltreatment and certain other abuse to the designated authority; psychologists are mandated reporters, and the duty is triggered by reasonable suspicion, not proof. The duty to protect (often framed as a Tarasoff-type duty) arises when a client poses a serious risk of violence to an identifiable person; responses may include warning the intended victim, notifying law enforcement, and taking protective clinical steps. Know the difference between a subpoena (a discovery request that requires a response but generally not automatic disclosure of privileged material) and a court order (which must be obeyed, subject to efforts to limit disclosure).
Traps
A frequent trap is requiring certainty before reporting - the standard is reasonable suspicion. Another is confusing the duty to warn with a duty to report to a central agency; they are different obligations. Questions may also test whether a subpoena compels disclosure of privileged records (generally not without authorization or court order) and whether a psychologist may ignore a court order on ethical grounds (no - seek to limit it, but comply).
Rule of thumb
Report on reasonable suspicion, document what was observed and reported, and never let a subpoena substitute for a court order when privileged material is at stake. When a serious threat exists, act protectively and document the steps.
Worked example
A client discloses a credible plan to seriously harm a named coworker. The psychologist assesses risk, takes protective action such as warning the intended victim and notifying law enforcement as permitted, arranges safety planning, and documents the assessment and actions.