Forensic psychology: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by 96.237.151.98 (talk) to last revision by ClueBot NG (HG) |
Sndenny1234 (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: blanking |
||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
|location=New York |
|location=New York |
||
|pages= |
|pages= |
||
|isbn= 0-8147-7857-7}}</ref> |
|isbn= 0-8147-7857-7}}</ref> |
||
<!-- == Training and education == |
|||
Forensic psychologists may hold a [[Ph.D.]] or [[Psy.D.]] in [[clinical psychology]], [[Social psychology]], [[Organizational psychology]], or [[Experimental psychology]]. In the United States, in order for a psychologist to practice as a forensic psychologist, it is preferable but not necessary that the individual be a state licensed psychologist and receive certification as a Diplomate in Forensic Psychology by the American Board of Forensic Psychology (although the latter is less important to judges). Ideally, the psychologist would have some years of postdoctoral experience in forensic psychology and have training and supervision in forensic psychology. However, practices vary from state to state and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In the United States legal system, the ultimate authority is the judge and the judge may select whomever he or she sees fit to qualify as an expert. |
|||
In other countries, training and practitioner requirements vary. In the United Kingdom, for example, a person must obtain the Graduate Basis for Registration with the British Psychological Society--normally through an undergraduate degree. This would be followed by Stages 1 (academic) and 2 (supervised practice) of the Diploma in Forensic Psychology (which would normally take 3 years full time and 4 years part time). Assessment occurs via examination, research, supervised practice, and the submission of a portfolio showing expertise across a range of criminological and legal applications of psychology. Once qualified as a "Chartered" psychologist (with a specialism in forensic psychology), a practitioner must engage in Continued Professional Development and demonstrate how much, of what kind, each year, in order to renew his/her practising certificate. |
|||
--> |
|||
== Distinction between forensic and therapeutic evaluation == |
|||
A forensic psychologist's interactions with and ethical responsibilities to the client differ widely from those of a psychologist dealing with a client in a clinical setting.<ref name="melton1997"/> |
|||
* '''Scope'''. Rather than the broad set of issues a psychologist addresses in a clinical setting, a forensic psychologist addresses a narrowly defined set of events or interactions of a nonclinical nature. |
|||
* '''Importance of client's perspective'''. A clinician places primary importance on understanding the client's unique point of view, while the forensic psychologist is interested in accuracy, and the client's viewpoint is secondary. |
|||
* '''Voluntariness'''. Usually in a clinical setting a psychologist is dealing with a voluntary client. A forensic psychologist evaluates clients by order of a judge or at the behest of an attorney. |
|||
* '''Autonomy'''. Voluntary clients have more latitude and autonomy regarding the assessment's objectives. Any assessment usually takes their concerns into account. The objectives of a forensic examination are confined by the applicable statutes or common law elements that pertain to the legal issue in question. |
|||
* '''Threats to validity'''. While the client and therapist are working toward a common goal, although unconscious distortion may occur, in the forensic context there is a substantially greater likelihood of intentional and conscious distortion. |
|||
* '''Relationship and dynamics'''. Therapeutic interactions work toward developing a trusting, empathic therapeutic alliance, a forensic psychologist may not ethically nurture the client or act in a "helping" role, as the forensic evaluator had divided loyalties and there are substantial limits on confidentiality he can guarantee the client. A forensic evaluator must always be aware of manipulation in the adversary context of a legal setting. These concerns mandate an emotional distance that is unlike a therapeutic interaction. |
|||
* '''Pace and setting'''. Unlike therapeutic interactions which may be guided by many factors, the forensic setting with its court schedules, limited resources, and other external factors, place great time constraints on the evaluation without opportunities for reevaluation. The forensic examiner focuses on the importance of accuracy and the finality of legal dispositions. |
|||
== Forensic psychology practice == |
|||
The forensic psychologist views the client or defendant from a different point of view than does a traditional clinical psychologist. Seeing the situation from the client's point of view or "empathizing" is not the forensic psychologist's task. Traditional psychological tests and interview procedure are not sufficient when applied to the forensic situation. In forensic evaluations, it is important to assess the consistency of factual information across multiple sources. Forensic evaluators must be able to provide the source on which any information is based. Unlike more traditional applications of clinical psychology, informed consent is not required when the assessment is ordered by the court. Instead, the defendant simply needs to be notified regarding the purpose of the evaluation and the fact that he or she will have no control over how the information obtained is used.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=gMp9h3al_-8C&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91&dq=%22feign+mental%22&source=web&ots=03hPV_0loZ&sig=SQVqmO4s8el7dJ_QDqPvq2_gOvk#PPA74,M1 |
|||
|title=Forensic Mental Health Assessment: A Casebook |
|||
|publisher=Oxford University Press |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-12 |
|||
}} |
|||
</ref> While psychologists infrequently have to be concerned about malingering or feigning illness in a non-criminal clinical setting, a forensic psychologist must be able to recognize [[exaggerated]] or faked symptoms. Malingering exists on a continuum so the forensic psychologist must be skilled in recognizing varying degrees of feigned symptoms.<ref>{{cite web |
|||
|url=http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/malingering.html |
|||
|title=Addressing The Issue of Malingering Within Forensic Assessment: |
|||
|publisher= |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-12 |
|||
}} |
|||
</ref> |
|||
Forensic psychologists perform a wide range of tasks within the criminal justice system. By far the largest is that of preparing for and providing testimony in the court room. This task has become increasingly difficult as attorneys have become sophisticated at undermining psychological testimony.<ref name="zizkin">{{cite book |
|||
|first=Ziskin |
|||
|last=Jay |
|||
|year=1981 |
|||
|title=Coping with Psychiatric and Psychological Testimony |
|||
|edition=3rd |
|||
|publisher=Law and Psychology Press |
|||
|location=Venice, CA |
|||
|page=372 |
|||
|isbn= 0-9603630-4-1 }}</ref> Evaluating the client, preparing for testimony, and the testimony itself require the forensic psychologist to have a firm grasp of the law and the legal situation at issue in the courtroom, using the [[Crime Classification Manual]] and other sources.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=John E. |
|||
|last=Douglas |
|||
|year=1992 |
|||
|title=Crime Classification Manual |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Lexington Books |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-02-874065-3 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Richard J. |
|||
|last=Bonnie |
|||
|year=1997 |
|||
|title=Criminal Law |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=The Foundation Press |
|||
|location=Westbury, NY |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 1-56662-448-7}}</ref> This knowledge must be integrated with the psychological information obtained from testing, psychological and mental status exams, and appropriate assessment of background materials, such as police reports, prior psychiatric or psychological evaluations, medical records and other available pertinent information.<ref name="shapiro1984"/> |
|||
=== [[Malingering]] === |
|||
An overriding issue in any type of forensic assessment is the issue of malingering and deception. A defendant may be intentionally faking a mental illness or may be exaggerating the degree of symptomatology. The forensic psychologist must always keep this possibility in mind. It is important if malingering is suspected to observe the defendant in other settings as it is difficult to maintain false symptoms consistently over time.<ref name="malinger">{{cite book |
|||
|first=Richard |
|||
|last=Rogers |
|||
|year=1997 |
|||
|title=Clinical Assessment of Malingering and Deception |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Guilford Press |
|||
|location= |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 1-57230-173-2}}</ref> In some cases, the court views malingering or feigning illness as obstruction of justice and sentences the defendant accordingly. In [[United States v. Binion]], malingering or feigning illness during a competency evaluation was held to be [[obstruction of justice]] and led to an enhanced sentence.<ref name="jaapl.org">{{cite web |
|||
|url=http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/34/1/126 |
|||
|title=Behavior of the Defendant in a Competency-to-Stand-Trial Evaluation Becomes an Issue in Sentencing |
|||
|publisher=Journal of the American Psychiatric Association |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-10 |
|||
}}</ref> As such, fabricating mental illness in a competency-to-stand-trial assessment now can be raised to enhance the sentencing level following a guilty plea.<ref name="jaapl.org"/> |
|||
=== Competency evaluations === |
|||
If there is a question of the accused's [[Competency evaluation (law)|competency]] to stand trial, a forensic psychologist is appointed by the court to examine and assess the individual. The individual may be in custody or may have been released on bail. Based on the forensic assessment, a recommendation is made to the court whether or not the defendant is competent to proceed to trial. If the defendant is considered incompetent to proceed, the report or testimony will include recommendations for the interim period during which an attempt at restoring the individual's competency to understand the court and legal proceedings, as well as participate appropriately in their defense will be made.<ref name="shapirointer"/> Often, this is an issue of committed, on the advice of a forensic psychologist, to a psychiatric treatment facility until such time as the individual is deemed competent.<ref name="grisso"/> |
|||
As a result of [[Ford v. Wainwright]], a case by a [[Florida]] inmate on [[death row]] that was brought before the [[Supreme Court of the United States]], forensic psychologists are appointed to assess the competency of an inmate to be executed in death penalty cases.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|year= |
|||
|month= |
|||
|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=S-B-iky44zEC&pg=PA164&lpg=PA164&dq=chattahoochee+hospital&source=web&ots=cvxwh_axuz&sig=qsUHkFu9lURAL0oGzlCplKpcG8I#PPA165,M1 |
|||
|title=Executing the Mentally Ill: The Criminal Justice System and the Case of Alvin Ford |
|||
|publisher=Sage Books |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-03 |
|||
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |
|||
|year= |
|||
|month= |
|||
|url=http://www.sagepub.com/booksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book4133 |
|||
|title=Executing the Mentally Ill |
|||
|publisher=Sage |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-03 |
|||
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |
|||
|year=1986 |
|||
|month=January |
|||
|url=http://www.apa.org/psyclaw/ford.html |
|||
|title=Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 |
|||
|publisher=American Psychological Association |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-03 |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
=== Sanity evaluations === |
|||
The forensic may also be appointed by the court to evaluate the defendant's state of mind at the time of the offense. These are defendants who the judge, prosecutor or public defender believe, through personal interaction with the defendant or through reading the police report, may have been significantly impaired at the time of the offense. In other situations, the defense attorney may decide to have the defendant plead not guilty by reason of insanity. In this case, usually the court appoints forensic evaluators and the defense may hire their own forensic expert. In actual practice, this is rarely a plea in a trial. Usually any judgments about the defendant's state of mind at the time of the offense are made by the court before the trial process begins.<ref name="rogers1986">{{cite book |
|||
|first=Richard |
|||
|last=Rogers |
|||
|year=1986 |
|||
|title=Conducting Insanity Evaluations |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Van Nostrand Reinhold |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-442-27945-0}}</ref> |
|||
=== Sentence mitigation === |
|||
Even in situations where the defendant's [[mental disorder]] does not meet the criteria for a not guilty by reason of insanity defense, the defendant's state of mind at the time, as well as relevant past history of mental disorder and psychological abuse can be used to attempt a mitigation of sentence. The forensic psychologist's evaluation and report is an important element in presenting evidence for sentence mitigation. In ''Hamblin v. Mitchell'', 335 F.3d 482 (6th Cir. 2003), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of a lower court because counsel did not thoroughly investigate the defendant's mental history in preparation for the sentencing phase of the trial. Specifically, the court stated that such investigation should include members of the defendant's immediate and extended family, medical history, and family and social history (including physical and mental abuse, domestic violence, exposure to traumatic events and criminal violence).<ref>{{cite web |
|||
|url=http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/119 |
|||
|title=Defining Counsel’s Role in Discovery and Disclosure of Mental Illness - Defense Counsel’s Failure to Investigate and Present Defendant’s Mental Health History in a Death Penalty Trial |
|||
|publisher=Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law |
|||
|accessdate=2007-10-11 |
|||
}} |
|||
</ref> This issue was further addressed in ''[[Wiggins v. Smith]]'' and ''[[Bigby v. Dretke]]''. |
|||
=== Other evaluations === |
|||
Forensic psychologists are frequently asked to make an assessment of an individual's dangerousness or risk of re-offending. They may provide information and recommendations necessary for sentencing purposes, grants of probation, and the formulation of conditions of parole, which often involves an assessment of the offender's ability to be rehabilitated. They are also asked questions of witness credibility and malingering.<ref name="malinger"/> Occasionally, they may also provide [[criminal profiler|criminal profiles]] to law enforcement.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Ronald |
|||
|last=Holmes |
|||
|year=1990 |
|||
|title=Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Sage |
|||
|location=Newbury Park, CA |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-8039-3628-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=J. Reid |
|||
|last=Meloy |
|||
|year=1998 |
|||
|title=The Psychology of Stalking |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Academic Press |
|||
|location=San Diego, CA |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-12-490560-9}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Robert K. |
|||
|last=Ressler |
|||
|year=1988 |
|||
|title=Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Lexington Books |
|||
|location=Lexington, MA |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-669-16559-x}}</ref> |
|||
Due to the Supreme Court decision upholding involuntary commitment laws for predatory sex offenders in [[Kansas v. Hendricks]], it is likely that forensic psychologists will become involved in making recommendations in individual cases of end-of-sentence civil commitment decisions. |
|||
=== Ethical implications === |
|||
A forensic psychologist generally practices within the confines of the courtroom, incarceration facilities, and other legal setting. It is important to remember that the forensic psychologist is equally likely to be testifying for the prosecution as for the defense attorney. A forensic psychologist does not take a side, as do the psychologists described below.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Stanley L. |
|||
|last=Brodsky |
|||
|year=1991 |
|||
|title=Testifying in Court: Guidelines and Maxims for the Expert Witness |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=American Psychological Association |
|||
|location=Washington, DC |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 1-55798-128-0 }}</ref> |
|||
The ethical standards for a forensic psychologist differ from those of a clinical psychologist or other practicing psychologist because the forensic psychologist is not an advocate for the client and nothing the client says is guaranteed to be kept confidential. This makes evaluation of the client difficult, as the forensic psychologist needs and wants to obtain all information while it is often not in the client's best interest to provide it. The client has no control over how that information is used.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Albert J. |
|||
|last=Datz |
|||
|year=1989 |
|||
|title=ABA Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=American Bar Association |
|||
|location=Washington DC |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-89707-450-5}}</ref> Despite the signing of a waiver of confidentiality, most clients do not realize the nature of the evaluative situation.<ref name="melton1997">{{cite book |
|||
|first=Melton |
|||
|last=Gary |
|||
|year=1997 |
|||
|title=Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers |
|||
|edition= 2nd |
|||
|publisher=The Guilford Press |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages=41–45 |
|||
|isbn= 1-57230-236-4}}</ref> Furthermore, the interview techniques differ from those typical of a clinical psychologist and require an understanding of the criminal mind and criminal and violent behavior.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Hans |
|||
|last=Toch |
|||
|year=1992 |
|||
|title=Violent Men: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Violence |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=The American Psychological Association |
|||
|location=Washington, DC |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 1-55798-172-8 }}</ref> For example, even indicating to a defendant being interviewed that an effort will be made to get the defendant professional help may be grounds for excluding the expert's testimony.<ref> |
|||
{{cite book |
|||
|first=Theodore |
|||
|last=Blau |
|||
|authorlink= |
|||
|coauthors= |
|||
|title=The Psychologist as Expert Witness |
|||
|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=FnqGD8Ze6GQC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=addington+v+texas&source=web&ots=lILjmNHWBZ&sig=ibIpobz_JhbqbAQ7emsgWFMZW-c#PPA26,M1 |
|||
|page=26 |
|||
|publisher=Wiley and Sons |
|||
|isbn=0471113662 |
|||
|accessdate=2008-01-23 }} |
|||
</ref> |
|||
In addition, the forensic psychologist deals with a range of clients unlike those of the average practicing psychologist. Because the client base is by and large criminal, the forensic psychologist is immersed in an abnormal world.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Hans |
|||
|last=Toch |
|||
|year=1989 |
|||
|title=The Disturbed Violent Offender |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Yale University Press |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-300-04533-6}}</ref> As such, the population evaluated by the forensic psychologist is heavily weighted with specific personality disorders.<ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Hervey |
|||
|last=Cleckley |
|||
|year=1982 |
|||
|title=The Mask of Sanity |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Plume Publishing |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-452-25341-1}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=Theodore |
|||
|last=Millon |
|||
|year=1996 |
|||
|title=Disorders of Personality: DSM-IV and Beyond |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=John Wiley & Sons |
|||
|location=New York |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-471-01186-X}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |
|||
|first=J. Reid |
|||
|last=Meloy |
|||
|year=1996 |
|||
|title=The Psychopathic Mind: Origins, Dynamics, and Treatment |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Brittany Steer |
|||
|location=Delano, MN |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-87668-311-1}}</ref> |
|||
The typical grounds for malpractice suits also apply to the forensic psychologist, such as wrongful commitment, inadequate informed consent, duty and breach of duty, and standards of care issues. Some situations are more clear cut for the forensic psychologist. The duty to warn, which is mandated by many states, is generally not a problem because the client or defendant has already signed a release of information, unless the victim is not clearly identified and the issue of the identifiability of the victim arises. However, in general the forensic psychologist is less likely to encounter malpractice suits than a clinical psychologist. The forensic psychologist does have some additional professional liability issues. As mentioned above, confidentiality in a forensic setting is more complicated that in a clinical setting as the client or defendant is apt to misinterpret the limits of confidentiality despite being warned and signing a release.<ref name="shapirointer">{{cite book |
|||
|first=David L. |
|||
|last=Shapiro |
|||
|year=1991 |
|||
|title=Forensic Psychological Assessment: An Integrative Approach |
|||
|edition= |
|||
|publisher=Simon & Schuster |
|||
|location=Needham Heights, MA |
|||
|pages= |
|||
|isbn= 0-205-12521-2}}</ref> |
|||
== See also == |
|||
* [[Applied psychology]] |
|||
* [[Ultimate issue (law)|Ultimate issue]] |
|||
* [[Forensic psychiatry]] |
|||
* [[Settled insanity]] |
|||
* ''[[Dusky v. United States]]'' |
|||
* ''[[Archuleta v. Hedrick]]'' |
|||
* ''[[United States v. Binion]]'' |
|||
* [[Competency evaluation (law)]] |
|||
* [[Chris Hatcher (psychologist)|Chris Hatcher, Ph.D.]] - [[Criminal profiler]] |
|||
* [[Theodore H. Blau]] - [[police psychology|police]] and [[Forensics|forensic]] psychologist |
|||
* [[Element (criminal law)|Elements of a crime]] |
|||
* [[Twinkie defense]] |
|||
* [[United States Supreme Court cases involving Mental Health]] |
|||
== Footnotes == |
|||
{{Reflist|2}} |
|||
== Further reading == |
|||
* Adler, J. R. (Ed.). (2004). ''Forensic Psychology: Concepts, debates and practice.'' Cullompton: Willan. |
|||
* Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (1999). History of Forensic Psychology. In A. K. Hess & [[Irving B. Weiner]] (Eds.), Handbook of Forensic Psychology (2nd ed., ). London: John Wiley and Sons. |
|||
* Blackburn, R. (1996). What is forensic psychology? Legal and Criminological Psychology. 1996 Feb; Vol 1(Part 1) 3-16 . |
|||
* Dalby, J. T. (1997) ''Applications of Psychology in the Law Practice: A guide to relevant issues, practices and theories''. Chicago: American Bar Association. ISBN 0-8493-0811-9 |
|||
* Davis, J. A. (2001). Stalking crimes and victim protection. CRC Press. 538 pages. ISBN 0-8493-0811-9. (hbk.) |
|||
* Duntley, J. D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2006). Toward an evolutionary forensic psychology. ''Social Biology, 51,'' 161-165. [http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Duntley-Shackelford-SB-2006.pdf Full text] |
|||
* Gudjonsson, G. (1991). Forensic psychology - the first century. Journal of forensic psychiatry, 2(2), 129. |
|||
* [[Gisli H. Gudjonsson|G.H. Gudjonsson]] and Lionel Haward: ''Forensic Psychology. A guide to practice.'' (1998) ISBN 0-415-13291-6 (pbk.), ISBN 0-415-13290-8 (hbk.) |
|||
* Ogloff, J. R. P., & Finkelman, D. (1999). Psychology and Law: An Overview. In R. Roesch, S. D. Hart, & J. R. P. Ogloff (Eds.), Psychology and Law the State of the Discipline . New York: Springer. ISBN 0-306-45950-7 |
|||
* Ribner, N.G.(2002). ''California School of Professional Psychology Handbook of Juvenile Forensic Psychology''. Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0-7879-5948-0 |
|||
== External links == |
|||
* [http://www.aafp.ws/ American Academy of Forensic Psychology] Board-certified forensic experts, continuing education. |
|||
* [http://www.abfp.com/ American Board of Forensic Psychology] Board certification and other information. |
|||
* [http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/ All About Forensic Psychology] Comprehensive Guide To Forensic Psychology. |
|||
* [http://www.ap-ls.org/ American Psychology - Law Society] |
|||
* [http://www.bps.org.uk/careers/what-do-psychologists-do/areas/forensic.cfm UK Forensic Psychology] Advice about Forensic Psychology from the British Psychological Society . |
|||
* [http://www.lawandpsychiatry.com/html/landmark.html Landmark Cases in Forensic Law] |
|||
* [http://bama.ua.edu/~jhooper/lm-abc.html List of Forensic Landmark Cases Chronologically] |
|||
* [http://www.forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/ Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology] |
|||
* [http://www.ap-ls.org/publications/newsletters/winter2005.pdf Quality of Practice in Forensic Psychology] |
|||
{{Psychology}} |
|||
[[Category:Forensic psychology| ]] |
|||
[[bg:Съдебна психология]] |
|||
[[ca:Psicologia jurídica]] |
|||
[[cs:Forenzní psychologie]] |
|||
[[de:Rechtspsychologie]] |
|||
[[es:Psicología forense]] |
|||
[[fa:روانشناسی جنایی]] |
|||
[[fr:Psychologie légale]] |
|||
[[id:Psikologi forensik]] |
|||
[[is:Réttarsálfræði]] |
|||
[[nl:Rechtspsychologie]] |
|||
[[no:Rettspsykologi]] |
|||
[[pl:Psychologia sądowa]] |
|||
[[ru:Судебная психология]] |
|||
[[si:අධිකරණ මනෝ විද්යාව]] |
|||
[[simple:Forensic psychology]] |
|||
[[sk:Forenzná psychológia]] |
|||
[[sl:Forenzična psihologija]] |
|||
[[sr:Форензичка психологија]] |
|||
[[uk:Судова психологія]] |
|||
Revision as of 19:27, 7 September 2011
| Part of a series on |
| Forensic science |
|---|
 |
| Part of a series on |
| Psychology |
|---|
 |
Forensic Psychology is the intersection between psychology and the criminal justice system. It involves understanding criminal law in the relevant jurisdictions in order to be able to interact appropriately with judges, attorneys and other legal professionals. An important aspect of forensic psychology is the ability to testify in court, reformulating psychological findings into the legal language of the courtroom, providing information to legal personnel in a way that can be understood.[1] Further, in order to be a credible witness, for example in the United States, the forensic psychologist must understand the philosophy, rules and standards of the American judicial system. Primary is an understanding of the adversarial system. There are also rules about hearsay evidence and most importantly, the exclusionary rule. Lack of a firm grasp of these procedures will result in the forensic psychologist losing credibility in the courtroom.[2] A forensic psychologist can be trained in clinical, social, organizational or any other branch of psychology.[3] In the United States, the salient issue is the designation by the court as an expert witness by training, experience or both by the judge. Generally, a forensic psychologist is designated as an expert in a particular jurisdiction. The number of jurisdictions in which a forensic psychologist qualifies as an expert increases with experience and reputation.
Questions asked by the court of a forensic psychologist are generally not questions regarding psychology but are legal questions and the response must be in language the court understands. For example, a forensic psychologist is frequently appointed by the court to assess a defendant's competency to stand trial. The court also frequently appoints a forensic psychologist to assess the state of mind of the defendant at the time of the offense. This is referred to as an evaluation of the defendant's sanity or insanity (which relates to criminal responsibility) at the time of the offense.[4] These are not primarily psychological questions but rather legal ones. Thus, a forensic psychologist must be able to translate psychological information into a legal framework.[5]
Forensic psychologists provide sentencing recommendations, treatment recommendations, and any other information the judge requests, such as information regarding mitigating factors, assessment of future risk, and evaluation of witness credibility. Forensic psychology also involves training and evaluating police or other law enforcement personnel, providing law enforcement with criminal profiles and in other ways working with police departments. Forensic psychologists work both with the Public Defender, the States Attorney, and private attorneys. Forensic psychologists may also help with jury selection.[6]
- ^ Nietzel, Michael (1986). Psychological Consultation in the Courtroom. New York: Pergamon Press. ISBN 0-08-030955-0.
- ^ Blau, Theodore H. (1984). The Psychologist as Expert Witness. New York: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 19–25. ISBN 0-471-87129-X.
- ^ "Speciality Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists" (PDF). Retrieved 2007-09-14.
{{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter:|month=(help) - ^ Grisso, Thomas (1988). Competency to Stand Trial Evaluations: A Manual for Practice (1988 ed.). Sarasota FL: Professional Resource Exchange. ISBN 0-943158-51-6.
- ^ Shapiro, David L. (1984). Psychological Evaluation and Expert Testimony. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. ISBN 0-442-28183-8.
- ^ Smith, Steven R. (1988). Law, Behavior, and Mental Health: Policy and Practice. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 0-8147-7857-7.