, 1996). In addition, liability in cases involving suicidal patients involve two additional elements: foreseeability and reasonable care: "Most important is foreseeability, which involves assessing the level of risk" (Corey, Corey, & Callanan, 1993, p. 130). Generally, the professional who takes due care and acts in good faith should not feel overly concerned about the threat of malpractice claims.
The liability issue for human services professionals in terms of civil rights lawsuits has yet to be resolved. The issue has not been considered by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals have ruled on immunity and its implications for social workers. Two conflicting opinions have resulted regarding whether social workers should be granted absolute immunity or qualified immunity in their investigative functions, with the Ninth Circuit favoring the former and the Sixth Circuit favoring the latter. Absolute immunity affords complete protection from the threat of civil lawsuits. For example, if a lawsuit for damages is filed, it is generally summarily dismissed on a motion. Qualified immunity, on the other hand, requires a decision by a judge as to whether the defendant adhered to his or her professional duties and did not know or reasonably should have known that his or her actions could have violated the plaintiff's civil rights. If the judge is satisfied that the defendant meets any of these conditions, the lawsuit does not proceed (Alexander, 1995, pp. 649, 653).
The social work profession itself debates the merits of giving human services professionals absolute or qualified immunity in civil cases. On the one hand, absolute immunity would free social workers from the threat of litigation and maximize their freedom in investigating and protecting the welfare of their clients. On the other hand, qualified immunity helps to keep the profession accountab...