Forensic Psychology Notes

Forensic Psychology

Forensic Psychology: The application of psychological methods and principles within the legal system.
There is little consensus about the specific content for training forensic psychologists.
Forensic psychology differs from other psychology roles because it places the clinical psychologist in an adversarial relationship between conflicting parties.
Establishing a positive relationship with the client is less common in forensic psychology, unlike therapeutic relationships.
The trust typically found in therapeutic relationships is often lacking in forensic work.

Common forensic assessments include child custody, competency, and presentencing evaluations.
It's crucial to consider ethical issues such as the limits of confidentiality.
Clients must be informed about these confidentiality limits.
Many forensic assessment techniques are standard clinical psychology techniques, such as clinical interviews, intelligence tests, and personality tests.
Forensic experts often favor using objective personality assessments.

NGRI Definition: If someone cannot control their actions due to a mental disorder, they are not held responsible for criminal actions and are found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI).
Consequences of NGRI: Defendants found NGRI are typically institutionalized for treatment rather than imprisoned.
Misconceptions about NGRI:
- The public often believes the NGRI defense is frequently used and successful, but it's used in less than 1% of felony jury trials and succeeds in only about 25% of those cases.
- There's a misconception that NGRI defendants are often released without being institutionalized.

Legal standards for NGRI vary by state and federal levels but require the presence of a mental disease or defect at the time of the offense.
American Law Institute (1962) Standard:
- “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of such conduct as a result of mental disease or defect he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.”

Child custody evaluations are among the most complex and challenging forensic evaluations.
Historically, the child’s well-being was not always prioritized.
Custody decisions are now based on “the best interest of the child doctrine.”
Children are typically not considered capable of making sound judgments in court.
Guardian ad litem: A neutral third party (often an attorney) is appointed to protect the child’s rights if parents cannot make sound decisions, preventing conflicts of interest.

The American Psychological Association (APA) provides guidelines for conducting these evaluations, but they remain uniquely challenging.
Evaluations involve multiple people and their relationships (e.g., parents, children).
Evaluators typically gather collateral information.
Typical components include:
- Clinical interviews with each parent and child.
- Observation of parent-child interactions.
- Psychological testing with the parents.
- Review of relevant documents.

Purpose: To assess the best psychological interests of the child.
The child’s interests and well-being are paramount.
Focus: Parenting capacity, the child’s psychological and developmental needs, and the resulting fit.

Role of Psychologist: A professional expert maintaining an objective, impartial stance.
The psychologist gains specialized competence.
Awareness: The psychologist is aware of personal and societal biases and engages in non-discriminatory practice.
Multiple relationships: The psychologist avoids multiple relationships.

Scope: Determined by the evaluator based on the referral question.
Informed consent: Obtained from all adult participants; child participants are informed as appropriate.
Confidentiality: Participants are informed about the limits of confidentiality and information disclosure.
Methods: The psychologist uses multiple data-gathering methods.
Interpretation: The psychologist avoids over- or inappropriate interpretation of clinical or assessment data.
Opinions: The psychologist does not give opinions on individuals not personally evaluated.
Recommendations: Based on the best psychological interests of the child.
Financials: The psychologist clarifies financial arrangements.
Records: The psychologist maintains written records.

Principle: The U.S. legal system, based on English common law, states that a person accused of a crime cannot be tried unless competent to stand trial.
Rationale: A person with a mental impairment might be unable to exercise their rights (e.g., Sixth Amendment protections) without a change in mental status.
Definition: Competency refers to the defendant’s present ability to understand the criminal process and function within it.
Focus: The focus is on the present mental state, not prior mental status or mental status at the time of the crime.

Assessment: Typically involves a clinical interview with questions about the legal system.
Restoration:
- Some jurisdictions have training programs to enhance understanding of the legal system.
- Medication is commonly used.
- The trial is postponed until competency is established.
- Limits: A defendant cannot be held longer than “the reasonable period of time necessary to determine” whether competency will be attained or longer than they would have been held if found guilty.

Definition: A process by which a person is involuntarily hospitalized by civil authorities for their welfare and the welfare of others.
Standards: Standards for involuntary commitment were very low prior to the 1970s.
Criticism: Civil commitments are criticized by some experts.
Process:
- Initial emergency admission is granted.
- Judicial approval is required for continued confinement.
Criteria:
- The individual must have a mental disorder.
- The individual must be dangerous to themselves or others.
- Most states consider an individual’s ability to care for basic needs.

Role: A clinical psychologist can provide expert testimony to the court about mental health issues.
Approval: Approved by the court through a process called voir dire, where their education, training, and professional experience are examined.
Distinction from Lay Witnesses: Lay witnesses can only testify to what they heard, saw, or experienced.
Scope: Experts can provide facts and opinions, make inferences from facts, and educate the jury or court about scientific information.