Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The treating psychiatrist as forensic evaluator.

R D Miller

    Journal of Forensic Sciences
    |July 1, 1984
    PubMed
    Summary

    Policies barring treating psychiatrists from forensic testimony may harm mentally ill defendants. This approach limits access to experienced forensic psychiatrists, potentially reducing the pool of qualified experts in criminal responsibility and competency evaluations.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Comparative genomics of the T cell receptor μ locus in marsupials and monotremes.

    Immunogenetics·2023
    Same author

    Opossum Mammary Maturation as It Relates to Immune Cell Infiltration and Nutritional Gene Transcription.

    Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England)·2020
    Same author

    WITHDRAWN: Corrigendum to "The pathology and pathogenicity of a novel Haemoproteus spp. infection in wild Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor)" [Vet. Parasitol. 197 (1-2) (2013) 74-84].

    Veterinary parasitology·2014
    Same author

    Near-field time-resolved fluorescence studies of poly(phenylmethyl silane) with subwavelength resolution.

    Journal of fluorescence·2013
    Same author

    The pathology and pathogenicity of a novel Haemoproteus spp. infection in wild Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor).

    Veterinary parasitology·2013
    Same author

    The epidemiology of published norovirus outbreaks: a review of risk factors associated with attack rate and genogroup.

    Epidemiology and infection·2012

    Area of Science:

    • Forensic Psychiatry
    • Legal Medicine
    • Mental Health Law

    Background:

    • Emphasis on "objective" or "impartial" expert psychiatric testimony in forensic cases.
    • Concerns that treating physicians cannot provide unbiased testimony regarding competency and criminal responsibility.
    • Regulations in many states aim to prevent "contamination" by treatment relationships.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To argue that current policies on psychiatric testimony may be detrimental to mentally ill defendants.
    • To highlight the potential benefits of allowing treating psychiatrists to testify in forensic cases.
    • To explore how treatment and evaluation opportunities might attract psychiatrists to forensic science.

    Main Methods:

    • Literature review on expert psychiatric testimony in forensic cases.
    • Argumentative analysis of existing state regulations and their impact.
    • Discussion of the dual role of treating and evaluating forensic psychiatric patients.

    Main Results:

    • Current policies may prevent mentally ill defendants from accessing psychiatrists with specialized forensic experience.
    • Excluding treating physicians limits the pool of potentially valuable expert witnesses.
    • The opportunity to both treat and evaluate could incentivize more psychiatrists to enter the forensic field.

    Conclusions:

    • Re-evaluation of regulations prohibiting treating psychiatrists from providing expert testimony is warranted.
    • Integrating treatment and evaluation roles may enhance the quality and availability of forensic psychiatric expertise.
    • Such integration could benefit both mentally ill defendants and the broader field of forensic science.

    Related Experiment Videos