Competency to stand trial is a subject within our criminal justice system that requires reliability and validity. Sadly practitioners who do not know the proper procedures to perform the Mental Status Exam are subject to the scrutiny of the court and could lose their role as a forensic examiner. Ultimately, a forensic psychology professional must use the most appropriate forensic assessment tools that have proven reliable when used in combination with sound and credible assessment measures. In oThe assesement method that must be widely used by others within the entire forensic psychology profession.
Determining competency to stand trial
When it comes to competency to stand trial, a forensic psychology practitioner must perform the Mental Status Exam in order to determine whether or not the defendant is competent enough to stand trial (Martin, 1994). In order for someone to be tried for their crimes, they must have the capacity
to understand the nature of the charges, to be able to consult with their counsel as well as assist with the preparation of their defense (Boch, 1994). Determining the level of a client's mental status requires clinicians to not just find out if they are capable of understanding but to get to the bottom of what exactly is going with the defendants’ complete psyche.
What is the Mental Status Exam?
The Mental Status Exam is a structured exam used to measure the level of consciousness, appearance and general behavior, speech and motor activity, affect and mood, thought, perception, attitude, and insight of the defendant in order to determine if they are truly incompetent (Martin, 1994). The examiner's reaction to the patient is recorded as well as the results from a structured examination of cognitive abilities (Martin, 1994). A defendant's attention is also assessed such as their level of wakefulness and consciousness during the interview (Martin, 1994).
According to the Dusky standard, any test must show if the defendant has the ability to consult with his attorney with a reasonable degree of understanding in addition to having a rational understanding of the proceedings against him or her (Boch, 1994). If a person is suspected of being incompetent to stand trial the reasons could be due to: low IQ, a mental illness or if a person malingers because they are afflicted with a personality disorder. Part of the Mental Status Exam also includes testing the defendant’s language, memory and motor skills which tell a lot about how the defendant functions (Martin, 1994). Actual body functions and physical impairments cannot be easily faked.
Ethical issues for forensic psychology
Forensic psychology professionals conducting any court mental evaluation must learn to exist in the extremely fast paced and demanding aspects of the criminal justice system. In a previous interview with a forensic psychologist I learned that practitioners in this field must be able to fit in, objectively. According to this Dr. he felt more comfortable with the public defender than the prosecution or private lawyers because of the urgency to move the case along as well as obtain a favorable diagnostic review.
What type of report is needed?
Forensic psychologists must prepare a quality report using not just the test results from diagnostic tools, but any other relevant collateral information from family; in addition to being prepared to use descriptive statistics which can help back up the practitioner’s findings in the report (Zapf & Roesch, 2000). Sometimes the urgency within our court system creates situations that call to question one's ethics (Zapf & Roesch, 2000). As long as a forensic psychologist is able to validate their findings with empirical data as well as maintain an objective demeanor the reliability of the Mental Status Exam is increased (Zapf & Roesch, 2000).
Psycho-legal issues related to competency
When it comes to psycholegal issues and competency, a forensic evaluator must be able to distinguish between the differences between psychology and law, as well as be ready to address the psycholegal issues (Ackerman, 2010). When looking at the psycholegal issues in a competency case the practitioner must be prepared to address the specific needs of the defendant and their mental abilities (Ackerman, 2010). When approaching psycholegal issues practitioners must look at the ideographic and nomothetic aspects in the case (Ackerman, 2010). Using a nomothetic approach requires practitioners to use structured and standardized tools; while using the ideographic approach which provides more variability to fit the client's needs (Ackerman, 2010). The mental status exam is a time when psychological tools help validate one’s diagnosis but using a nomothetic approach utilizing standardized test can be more predictable rather than the ideographic approach which can be more unpredictable due to the variability of unstructured interview approach (Ackerman, 2010).
An example of using the nomothetic approach could find a clinician using a more structured approach like with the DSM-IV. Knowing when an unstructured interview is appropriate as is the case with someone who could be malingering will ultimately determine the best reliability and validity of the forensic assessment (Ackerman, 2010). When it comes to psycho-legal issues related to competency, the practitioner conducting the interview must be able to determine the best possible approach to ensure not just accuracy but validity.
References
Ackerman, M. (2010) Essentials of forensic psychological assessment John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
(5th Edition)
Martin, D. (1990) Clinical methods: The history, physical and laboratory examinations U.S.
National Library of Medicine Institutes of Health website. Retrieved March 19, 2011 from
Boch, B. (1994) Fourteenth Amendment -- the standard of mental competency to waive
Constitutional rights versus the competency standard to stand trial Journal of Criminal Law
& Criminology Vol. 84, p883-914 32p. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database.
Zapf, P., Roesch, R. (2000) Mental competency evaluations: Guideline for judges and attorneys
Court Review. Retrieved March 19, 2011 from
No comments:
Post a Comment