Le rapport d’expertise psychologique ou psychiatrique dans un contexte légal : faiblesses et ressources pour l’améliorer

Abstract

IntroductionForensic assessments are mandated by judicial authorities to answer various questions and to assist in the judicial decision-making process. Judicial expertise is frequently the subject of publications; however, few French-speaking studies have focused on written forensic reports, i.e. the way in which the report is presented and written by the author. The way in which the report is written could have an impact on the perception of the situation of the person being assessed, on the value attributed to this complex assessment, and on the judicial decisions. Thus, the objective of this article is to review the main criticisms in forensic reports in scientific literature, as well as the resources that could help to improve them and ensure conformity to professional expectations. MethodThis article presents a narrative review of the scientific literature. It focuses on English and French publications and literature reviews in the field of forensic psychology and psychiatry. ResultsThe review of the literature identified four aspects that could affect the quality of the report: 1/The expert framework and the position of the expert; 2/The terminology and writing styles used in the report; 3/The lack of reference to general principles of psycho-legal assessment; and 4/Weaknesses in the organization of the data and in the argumentative approach to answering the questions. ConclusionThe weaknesses identified in the literature reviewed could be improved through training of the experts, the implementation of assessment guides, experts’ collegiality, and checklists.