Recovered-Memory Therapy,supra at 792. Second, the likelihood of harm is considerable where an unqualified therapist, e.g., one lacking in appropriate training or experience, attempts a diagnosis. Third, the prospect of misdiagnosis and resultant false accusations is enhanced where a therapist bases a diagnosis on a psychological phenomenon or technique not generally accepted inthe mental health community. The concept of repressed memories of sexual abuse is extremely controversial. Finally, the likelihood of harm to an accused parent is exponentially compounded when treating therapists take public action based on false accusations of sexual abuse or encourage their patients to do so.
Public action encompasses any effort to make the allegations common knowledge in the community.
In this situation, the foreseeability of harm is so great that public policy weighs in favor of imposing on the therapist a duty of care to the accused parent throughout the therapeutic process. We recognize, however, that there are circumstances in which the therapist is immune from liability. III Several jurisdictions have struggled with determining whether, and under what circumstances, therapists owe a duty to third parties, and have reached differing conclusions based on competing public policy considerations. This reasoning,however, overlooks the fact that the standard of care by which a therapist's conduct is measured is not heightened. We recognize that in most circumstances, the balance between protecting children from sexual abuse and guarding against false accusations is best struck by permitting the therapist broad latitude in ferreting out signs or symptoms of past sexual abuse without fear of liability to the accused.