Tipping the Scales Of Justice: The Role of Forensic Evaluations in the Criminalization of Mental Illness

Chapter 28 - Tipping the Scales Of Justice: The Role of Forensic Evaluations in the Criminalization of Mental Illness

from Part V - Criminal Justice and Social Considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 October 2021

Katherine E. McCallum and

W. Neil Gowensmith

Edited by

Katherine Warburton and

Stephen M. Stahl

Show author details

Katherine Warburton: Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Stephen M. Stahl: Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego

Book contents

Get access

Summary

For psychologists or psychiatrists conducting forensic evaluations, a forensic psychological report is a work product – one of many reports they will author over the course of their careers. Many forensic evaluators conduct a large number of evaluations per year; for example, Colorado state evaluators conduct an average of 144 competency to stand trial (CST) evaluations per year. For psychologists or psychiatrists who author a large volume of evaluations, some cases may seem routine. Evaluators may fall into a pattern in which many evaluations appear mundane and typical.

Type: Chapter
Information: Decriminalizing Mental Illness , pp. 281 - 288

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108920698 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

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.)

Subscription

Individual access

Subscriptions are only available for individuals and not institutional access. Subscribe now

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, AM, 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.Google 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.Google Scholar

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.Google 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.Google Scholar

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 June 2020).Google Scholar

Eaton, E. Man who killed Elmendorf police chief found not guilty by reason of insanity. San Antonio Express News. July 2, 2018. www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Man-who-killed-Elemendorf-police-chief-found-not-13044383.php (accessed June 2020).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.Google Scholar

Locklair, B. Due process problems with civil commitment of incompetent defendants: the current round of litigation and the next. Presentation to 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? Presentation to 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. Presentation to 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.Google Scholar

Robinson, R, Acklin, MW. Fitness in paradise: quality of forensic reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. Int J Law Psychiatry. 2010; 33: 131–137.Google Scholar

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.Google Scholar

Parker, G. Come see the bias inherent in the system! J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2016; 44(4): 411–414.Google Scholar

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.Google Scholar

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.CrossRef Google 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.CrossRef Google 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.Google Scholar

Murrie, DC, Warren, JI. Clinician variation in rates of legal sanity opinions: implications for self-monitoring. Prof Psychol. 2005; 36: 519–524.Google 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.Google Scholar

Melton, GB, Petrila, J, Poythress, NG, et al. Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers, 3rd edn. 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.Google Scholar

Fitch, WL. Assessment #3. Forensic mental health services in the United States: 2014. (Report No. 3, HHSS2834200IT). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors; 2014.Google Scholar

Wisconsin Department of Health Services. 2015 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 Office of Behavioural Health. Needs analysis: current status, strategic positioning, and future planning. Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education Mental Health Program; April 2015.Google Scholar

Sewall, A. L.A. County supervisors order report on unexplained surge in mental competency cases. Los Angeles Times; March 8, 2016. www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-mental-competency-cases-20160308-story.html (accessed June 2020).Google Scholar

Gowensmith, WN, Murrie, DC, Packer, IK. Report in Response to the Trueblood v. State Washington’s Department of Social and Health Services. Olympia, WA: Office of Attorney General, State of Washington; 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.Google 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. Presentation to the American Psychology-Law Society annual meeting; 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.Google Scholar

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.CrossRef Google Scholar

Petrella, RC, Poythress, NG. The quality of forensic evaluations: an interdisciplinary study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983; 51(1): 76–85.Google 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.Google Scholar

Kois, L, Pearson, J, Chauhan, P, et al. Competency to stand trial among female inpatients. Law Hum Behav, 2013; 37(4): 231–240.Google Scholar

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 Scholar

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 state wide sample of sexually violent predator evaluations. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2008; 14: 262–283.Google 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.Google 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.Google 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.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dror, IE, Murrie, DC. A hierarchy of expert performance applied to forensic psychological assessments. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2018; 24(1): 11–23.Google 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.Google Scholar

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.Google 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.Google Scholar

National Judicial College. Mental competencies: best practices model. 2011–2012. www.mentalcompetency.org/pdf/BP-Model.pdf (accessed June 2020).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; 49(2): 165–176.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.Google Scholar

Neal, T, Grisso, T. The cognitive underpinnings of bias in forensic mental health evaluations. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2014; 20(2): 200–211.Google 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