Ethical Issues In Forensic Psychiatry Research Articles

Ethical Controversies in Forensic Psychiatry

Conflicts between the various ethical principles not only practical, but also conceptual, are commonplace in forensic psychiatry as many professional responsibilities and activities of forensic psychiatry are unique to the field, where duties to patients often conflict with duties to third parties for instance the community. The ethical issues in forensic psychiatry are multifaceted and more controversial than in general psychiatry. Forensic psychiatry, more than other disciplines, has been besieged as an area most in need to provide protection of patient's rights. The discussion on these ethical issues has to keep pace with the growth of science, socioeconomic conditions and changing democratic processes. We point that justice should be vital in forensic psychiatry, and that there is a want for a more specific code of ethics to cover specialized areas of medicine like forensic psychiatry and the paths that need to be considered for the purpose should include the com-bination of ideal standards with enforceable set of rules after collecting and analysing as many practically encountered ethical problems as possible in the course of practice, and by regularly updating the code.

Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry

Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry

Book Section: Essays and Reviews: Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry: Minimizing Harm

Book Section: Essays and Reviews: Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry: Minimizing Harm

Review of: Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry: Minimizing Harm

Review of: Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry: Minimizing Harm

Ethical issues in forensic psychiatry in penal and other correctional facilities

Forensic mental health practitioners, especially psychiatrists working in jails, prisons or other correctional facilities, face special problems that are unlike others encountered in bioethics. Literature published during the past year shows that the forensic psychiatrist has to adhere to role clarity: as a physician, he is primarily obligated to the treatment and well being of the incarcerated patients and is not exclusively an agent of social control. Moreover, the general conditions in a therapeutic setting (e.g. dealing with medical confidentiality) have to be clear and transparent to the patients. Different ethical models building a fitting framework for forensic practice are used. Forensic psychiatric practice in penal and other correctional facilities poses particular ethical dilemmas. There is a great need for international humanitarian law, which serves both to protect vulnerable prisoners and to shield health professionals who treat prisoners with respect and dignity from abuse or penalty. It must be a common objective to find the right balance between protection from exploitation and access to research beneficial to prisoners.

Ethical issues in forensic psychiatry

Clinical dilemmas in medicine involve reasoning about what ‘can’ be done, using technical skills and knowledge. Ethical dilemmas involve reasoning about what ‘should’ be done by the good doctor, and deciding what ‘good’ means in the context of medical relationship. This contribution offers an introduction to ethical dilemmas and reasoning in forensic psychiatry.

Ethical issues in forensic psychiatry.

Forensic psychiatry has been established as a subspecialty of psychiatry in the past two decades. The initiation of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law as the outstanding organization of forensic psychiatrists in the country, the founding of the American Board of Forensic Psychiatry in the late 1970s, and finally, the development of specialized training programs and fellowships in forensic psychiatry, all attest to the growth and presence of the subspecialty. In many ways, forensic psychiatrists serve as the spokespersons for psychiatry, as they attain exposure, both in court and in the media, commenting on principles of psychiatry and mental health. The changes in mental health legislation and the increase in psychiatric malpractice claims have also served to enhance the subspecialty of forensic psychiatry.

Controversial Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry: A Survey

A survey was conducted of members of the Psychiatry and Behavioral Science section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) to determine their ethical concerns about controversial items. Issues were included in the survey from the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and AAFS Code of Ethics. Strong support was found for those issues. Some AAPL items from a previous version of their guidelines did not receive support. Fortunately, they have been modified in a later AAPL draft, after AAPL received this survey's results. Clarification was obtained on some ambiguous items from a previous AAFS survey. The present survey showed strong support for addressing in forensic psychiatry's ethical guidelines some issues previously considered too controversial.

Psychiatric testimony: what are its limits?

Although elder statesman Karl Menninger, MD, has long held that "we psychiatrists don't belong in the courtroom... it is not our proper sphere of action," many members of the specialty seem to be spending a good deal of time in that venue. According to speakers at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) meeting in Anaheim, Calif, this situation has led several thoughtful psychiatrists to ponder how they should practice their specialty in the legal setting to best serve both the accused and the accusing segments of society. The subjects addressed by two psychiatrists who spoke on "Ethical Issues in Forensic Psychiatry" at the AAFS meeting illustrate some important current concerns. Arthur F. Sullwold, MD, assistant professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, formulated with Gerald T. Bennett, JD, professor of law at the University of Florida's Holland Law Center, some views on "qualifying the psychiatrist

Ethical issues in the practice of forensic psychiatry.

The recent, rapid development of the practice of forensic psychiatry has led to an increasing awareness of and a growing concern about the ethical issues that inhere in this subspecialty. While some such issues are similar to those found in the general practice of psychiatry (confidentiality, informed consent, etc.), there are aspects of these and other ethical issues which are unique to the practice of forensic psychiatry. On October 16 and 17, 1980, at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law held in Chicago, Illinois, a panel discussion concerning ethical issues in forensic psychiatry took place. The chairman was Henry C. Weinstein, M.D., Director, Forensic Psychiatry Services, Bellevue Hospital Center, New York. This panel, made up of two forensic psychiatrists and two philosophers (with special interests in medical ethics), discussed the ethical issues in the practice of forensic psychiatry from a variety of perspectives. A general statement in regard to ethics and forensic psychiatry opened the panel, followed by a series of presentations relating to specific ethical issues, including those which face the forensic psychiatrist practicing in a secure forensic unit, those which arise in the practice of forensic psychiatry with children and adolescents, as well as ethical issues relating to research in forensic psychiatry. A special program for the exploration and teaching of ethical issues, in a clinical forensic psychiatric setting, utilizing a philosopher-in-residence, was described and discussed. The panel presentation was concluded by a commentary from the philosophical perspective.

The Uses of Psychiatry in the Law: A Clinical View of Forensic Psychiatry

The authoritative, well-organized, objectively presented material of<i>The Uses of Psychiatry in the Law</i>came out of a series of lectures given to law students by Dr Walter Bromberg. A highly respected teacher and clinician with vast courtroom experience, Bromberg has aptly subtitled his book, "A Clinical View of Forensic Psychiatry." In his preface he modestly claims that his book will be "comprehensive but not exhaustive." I think the author has succeeded in presenting a refreshing and highly enlightening piece of work containing useful and practical information. Without being carried away by philosophical discussions on moral and ethical issues in forensic psychiatry, he successfully manages to cover virtually all of the important areas in law and psychiatry. The presentation begins with a brief introduction and moves smoothly to the courtroom scene where the psychiatrist-witness is put through the process of qualifying as an expert. Bromberg includes many verbatim excerpts of