Related Experiment Videos
Establishing standards for criminal forensic reports: an empirical analysis
1Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. rborum@psych.mc.duke.edu
The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
|January 1, 1996
Summary
Forensic experts agree on essential elements for competency to stand trial (CST) and criminal responsibility (CR) reports. However, consensus is lacking on providing ultimate opinions in these critical forensic evaluations.
Area of Science:
- Forensic Psychology
- Forensic Psychiatry
- Legal Psychology
Background:
- Forensic evaluations are crucial in legal proceedings.
- Standards for report content in forensic psychology and psychiatry are essential for consistent practice.
Purpose of the Study:
- To survey forensic psychologists and psychiatrists on their views regarding essential content for competency to stand trial (CST) and criminal responsibility (CR) reports.
- To identify areas of agreement and disagreement on report elements, including ultimate opinions.
Main Methods:
- Survey of 102 forensic psychologists and 96 forensic psychiatrists.
- Inquiry into beliefs about necessary and appropriate content for CST and CR forensic reports.
Main Results:
- General agreement on essential elements like defendant identification, evaluation methods, and clinical data.
- Specific data elements for CST (understanding charges) and CR (offense details) were deemed essential.
- Disagreement exists regarding the inclusion and importance of "ultimate opinions," especially for CR.
Conclusions:
- Cross-disciplinary agreement on core content for forensic reports, but variations in perceived importance of specific elements.
- Findings have implications for developing professional standards and practice guidelines in forensic mental health.
- Discussion includes the advantages and cautions of using survey data for policy and standards development.