Abstract
ABSTRACTForensic psychologists and psychiatrists are regularly called upon to conduct sexually violent predator (SVP) evaluations. Commonly, the DSM-5 diagnostic category of paraphilic disorders is used to establish whether an offender has a mental abnormality outlined by the SVP laws. Importantly, the use of paraphilic disorders to establish the mental abnormality criterion has given rise to several ethical concerns, including questions related to validity and reliability. The diagnoses of unspecified paraphilic disorder and other specified paraphilic disorder (including the nonconsent and hebephilia specifiers) have been especially controversial. Therefore, the present article will explore the use of paraphilic disorder diagnoses in the context of SVP evaluations, with emphasis on the other specified paraphilic disorder (OSPD) and unspecified paraphilic disorder (UPD) categories. Moreover, we provide relevant ethical considerations and recommendations for clinicians conducting SVP evaluations in light of the guidelines set forth by the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct and the American Psychological Association’s Specialty Guidelines in Forensic Psychology.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
