Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:12:19.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tipping the scales of justice: the role of forensic evaluations in the criminalization of mental illness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2019

Katherine E. McCallum Open the ORCID record for Katherine E. McCallum [Opens in a new window]  and
W. Neil Gowensmith
Katherine E. McCallum*
Affiliation:
The Denver Forensic Institute for Research, Service, and Training (Denver FIRST), Graduate School of Professional Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
W. Neil Gowensmith
Affiliation:
The Denver Forensic Institute for Research, Service, and Training (Denver FIRST), Graduate School of Professional Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
*
*Address correspondence to: Katherine E. McCallum, Denver FIRST, University of Denver, Denver, CO80220-1857, USA.(Email: katemccallumphd@gmail.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An unprecedented number of individuals with mental illness are represented in the criminal justice system. The unending growth of mentally ill populations in the justice system has led to jails and court dockets being increasingly overwhelmed with cases involving mental illness, state hospitals devoting far more beds and resources to forensic cases, and people without a criminal commitment left waiting for mental health services as forensic cases are prioritized. Although a forensic mental health evaluation is only one component of this larger system, common problems with forensic mental health evaluations can exacerbate the criminalization of persons with mental illness in many ways. This article reviews the current literature regarding issues of quality, reliability, and validity of forensic mental health evaluations, discusses the broader impact of these issues, and offers potential solutions for the field.

Keywords

Forensic psychologyforensic psychiatrycompetency to stand trialforensic mental health evaluationcriminalization of mental illnesssanity evaluation
Type
Review
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 154 - 160
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES:

Center for Legal Advocacy v. Bicha et al, U.S. District Court of Colorado, Case No. 1:2011cv02285 (2011).Google Scholar
Redding, RE, Murrie, DC. Judicial Decision Making about Forensic Mental Health Evidence. In: Goldstein, A. M., ed. Forensic Psychology: Emerging Topics and Expanding Roles. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2007:683–707.Google Scholar
Acklin, MW, Fuger, K, Gowensmith, WN Examiner agreement and judicial consensus in forensic mental health evaluations. J Forensic Psychol Pract. 2015;15(4):318–343. doi:10.1080/15228932.2015.1051447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowensmith, WN, Murrie, DC & Boccaccini, MT Field reliability of competence to stand trial opinions: How often do evaluators agree, and what do judges decide when evaluators disagree? Law Hum Behav. 2012;36(2):130–139. doi:10.1037/h0093958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zapf, PA, Hubbard, KL, Cooper, VG, et al. Have the courts abdicated their responsibility for determination of competency to stand trial to clinicians? J Forensic Psychol Pract. 2004;4(1):27–44. doi:10.1300/J158v04n01_02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruise, KR, Rogers, R. An analysis of competency to stand trial: an integration of case law and clinical knowledge. Behav Sci Law. 1998;16(1):35–50. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0798(199824)16:1<35::AID-BSL292>3.0.CO;2-4.3.0.CO;2-4>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mowen, E. Charges dismissed in crash which claimed family. Register Herald. July 7, 2018. www.registerherald.com/news/22514/charges-dismissed-in-crash-which-claimed-family. Accessed April 19, 2019.Google Scholar
Eaton , E. Man who killed Elmendorf police chief found not guilty by reason of insanity. San Antonio Express News. July 2, 2018. http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Man-who-killed-Elemendorf-police-chief-found-not-13044383.php. Accessed April 19, 2019.Google Scholar
Gowensmith, WN Resolution or resignation: The role of forensic mental health professionals amidst the competency services crisis. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2019;25(1):1 – 14. doi:10.1037/law0000190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locklair, B. Due process problems with civil commitment of incompetent defendants: The current round of litigation and the next. Paper presented at: The American Psychology-Law Society Annual Conference; 2016, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Bryson, CN, Boccaccini, MT, Gowensmith, WN, et al. Does time matter in competency to stand trial evaluations? Paper presented at: The annual meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society; March 2019; Portland, OR.Google Scholar
Gowensmith, WN, Metroz, H, Bratcher, J. The impact of timing on competency to stand trial evaluations. Paper presented at: The annual meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society; March 2016; Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Nguyen, AH, Acklin, MW, Fuger, K, et al. Freedom in paradise: Quality of conditional release reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2011;34(5):341–348. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.08.006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, R, Acklin, MW. Fitness in paradise: Quality of forensic reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2010;33:131–137. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2010.03.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boccaccini, MT, Chevalier, CS, Murrie, DC, et al. Psychopathy Checklist—Revised use and reporting practices in sexually violent predator evaluations. Sex Abuse. 2017;29(6):592–614. doi:10.1177/1079063215612443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, G. Come see the bias inherent in the system! J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2016;44(4):411–414.Google ScholarPubMed
Chevalier, CS, Boccaccini, MT, Murrie, DC, et al. Static-99R reporting practices in sexually violent predator cases: Does norm selection reflect adversarial allegiance? Law Hum Behav. 2015;39(3):209–218. doi:10.1037/lhb0000114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCallum, KE, MacLean, N, & Gowensmith, WN The impact of defendant ethnicity on the psycho-legal opinion of forensic evaluators. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2014;39:6–12. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.01.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrie, DC, Boccaccini, MT, Guarnera, LA, et al. Are forensic experts biased by the side that retained them? Psychol Sci. 2013;24(10):1889–1897. doi:10.1177/0956797613481812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrie, DC, Boccaccini, M, Zapf, PA, et al. Clinician variation in findings of competence to stand trial. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2008;14:177–193. doi:10.1037/a0013578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrie, DC & Warren, JI. Clinician variation in rates of legal sanity opinions: Implications for self-monitoring . Prof Psychol. 2005;36:519–524. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.36.5.519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagen, MA. Whores of the Court: The Fraud of Psychiatric Testimony and the Rape of American Justice. New York, NY, US: Harper Collins Publishers; 1997.Google Scholar
Bergeron, ML. The use of psychiatric expertise in the forensic context: Balm or blunder. Windsor Yearb Access Justice. 1994;14:221.Google Scholar
Faust, D, Ziskin, J. The expert witness in psychology and psychiatry. Science. 1988;241(4861):31–35. doi:10.1126/science.3291114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melton, GB, Petrila, J, Poythress, NG, et al. Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers (3rd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 2007.Google Scholar
Warren, JI, Chuahan, P, Kois, L, et al. Factors influencing 2260 opinions of defendants’ restorability to adjudicative competency. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2013;19:498–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitch, WL. Forensic mental health services in the United States (Report No. 3, HHSS2834200IT). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors; 2014.Google Scholar
Wisconsin Department of Health Services. Annual Report (Report No. P-00568). Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Health Services; 2015.Google Scholar
Joint Legislative and Audit Review Committee. State of Washington Final Report: Competency to Stand Trial, Phase II (Report No. 14-1). Olympia, WA: Joint Legislative and Audit Review Committee; 2014.Google Scholar
Colorado Department of Human Services. Needs analysis: Current status, strategic positioning, and future planning. 2015. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagename=CDHS-BehavioralHealth/CBONLayout&cid=1251662741340&pagename=CBONWrapper. Accessed September 13, 2015.Google Scholar
Sewall , A. L.A. County supervisors order report on unexplained surge in mental competency cases. Los Angeles Times; March 8, 2016. https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-mental-competency-cases-20160308-story.html. Accessed April 15, 2019.Google Scholar
Gowensmith, WN, Murrie, DC, Packer, IK. Report in Response to the Trueblood v. State Washington’s Department of Social and Health Services. State of Washington: Office of Attorney General; 2015.Google Scholar
Oregon Advocacy Center v. Mink. No. 02-35530, 9th Cir.; 2003.Google Scholar
Trueblood v. State of Washington Department of Human and Social Services. No. 2:2014cv01178, Washington Western District Court; 2015.Google Scholar
Pirelli, G, Gottdiener, WH, Zapf, PA. A meta-analytic review of competency to stand trial research. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2011;17(1):1–53. doi:10.1037/a0021713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Roskes, personal communication, December 12, 2014 Google Scholar
Bryson, CN, Boccaccini, MT, Gowensmith, WN, et al. Time matters in competency to stand trial evaluations. Poster presented at: The Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society; March 2018; Memphis, TN.Google Scholar
Skeem, JL, Golding, SL, Cohn, NB, et al. Logic and reliability of evaluations of competence to stand trial. Law Hum Behav. 1998;22(5):519–547. doi:10.1023/A:1025787429972. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gowensmith, WN, Pinals, DA, & Karas, AC States’ standards for training and certifying evaluators of competency to stand trial. J Forensic Psychol Pract. 2015;15(4):295–317. doi:10.1080/15228932.2015.1046798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrella, RC & Poythress, NG. The quality of forensic evaluations: An interdisciplinary study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51(1):76–85. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.51.1.76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poythress, NG, Otto, RK, & Heilbrun, K. Pretrial evaluations for criminal courts: Contemporary models of service delivery. J Ment Health Adm. 1991; 18:198–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kois, L, Pearson, J, Chauhan, P, et al. Competency to stand trial among female inpatients. Law Hum Behav, 2013;37(4):231–240. doi:10.1037/lhb0000014 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mossman, D, Noffsinger, SG, Ash, P, et al. AAPL practice guideline for the forensic psychiatric evaluation of competence to stand trial. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2007;35:S3–S72.Google ScholarPubMed
Pinals, DA, Tillbrook, CE, & Mumley, DL Practical application of the MacArthur competence assessment tool—criminal adjudication (MacCAT-CA) in a public sector forensic setting. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2006;34:179–188.Google Scholar
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 405 U.S. 597 (1993).Google Scholar
Boccaccini, MT, Turner, D, & Murrie, DC Do some evaluators report consistently higher or lower psychopathy scores than others? Findings from a statewide sample of sexually violent predator evaluations. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2008;14:262–283. doi:10.1037/a00114523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960).Google Scholar
Mossman, D. When forensic examiners disagree: Bias, or just inaccuracy? Psychol Public Policy Law. 2013;19(1):40–55. doi:10.1037/a0029242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrie, DC, Boccaccini, MT, Turner, D, et al. Rater (dis)agreement on risk assessment measures in sexually violent predator proceedings: Evidence of adversarial allegiance in forensic evaluation? Psychol Public Policy Law. 2009;15:19–53. doi:10.1037/a0014897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, LA, & Silver, E. Factors associated with the conditional release of persons acquitted by reason of insanity: A decision tree approach. Law Hum Behav. 1998;22:147–163. doi:10.1023/A:1025790003139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gowensmith, WN, Murrie, DC, Boccaccini, MT Field reliability of competence to stand trial opinions: How often do evaluators agree, and what do judges decide when evaluators disagree? Law Hum Behav. 2012;36(2):130–139. doi:10.1037/h0093958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dror, IE, Murrie, DC A hierarchy of expert performance applied to forensic psychological assessments. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2018;24(1):11–23. doi:10.1037/law0000140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mossman, D, Bowen, MD, Vanness, DJ, et al. Quantifying the accuracy of forensic examiners in the absence of a “gold standard.” Law Hum Behav. 2010;34(5):402–417. doi:10.1007/s10979-009-9197-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gowensmith, WN, Murrie, DC, Boccaccini, MT, et al. Field reliability influences field validity: Risk assessments of individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity. Psychol Assess. 2017;29(6):786–794. doi:10.1037/pas0000376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowensmith, WN, Sledd, M, & Sessarego, S. The impact of stringent certification standards on forensic evaluator reliability: Further analysis. Paper presented at: The Annual Meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society; March 2015; San Diego, CA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Judicial College. Mental Competencies: Best practices manual. 2011-2012. http://www.mentalcompetency.org/pdf/BP-Model.pdf. Accessed September 13, 2015.Google Scholar
Gowensmith, WN & McCallum, KE. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the least biased of them all? Dangers and potential solutions regarding bias in forensic psychological evaluations. S Afr J Psychol. 2019:1–12. doi:10.1177/0081246319835117.Google Scholar
Pronin, E, Kugler, MB Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2007;43(4):565–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neal, T, Grisso, T The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2014;20(2):200–211. doi:10.1037/a0035824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodsky, SL. Testifying in Court: Guidelines and Maxims for the Expert Witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1991.Google Scholar
Brodsky, SL. The Expert Expert Witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1999.Google Scholar
Gowensmith, WN, McCallum, KE, Nadkarni, L, et al. Monitoring potential bias within a forensic evaluation agency. Paper presented at: The Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society; March 2019; Portland, OR.Google Scholar