âForensic Clinical Psychology as an Emerging ... - SRM University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

in mentally retarded individuals, complicating diagnostic accuracy (Glick and Zigler, 1995) noted that psychiatric in-patients with mental retardation demonstrated a significantly higher rate of expressing their symptoms actively, outwardly, and aggressively in comparison to inpatients without mental retardation. Individuals presenting with both mental retardation and psychiatric disorder are more likely to incur diagnoses that reflect aggressive and antisocial behavior than psychiatric patients of normal intelligence. Hence thorough diagnostic evaluation in legal situations where there is any suspicion of mental retardation is herded (Kinsler et al., 2004) Criminal Responsibility: Individuals with mental retardation suffer at every stage in the criminal process from the moment of arrest through the trial process. They are at a disadvantage because of the social defects associated their disability. When first arrested, individuals with mental retardation may do not realize the gravity of the charges and simply know that they are in trouble and afraid, and blurt out confessions. The mentally retarded individual may not be aware of the need for legal counsel. Competence to Stand Trial: Competence to stand trial is a complicated issue with these mentally retarded defendants. If a defendant sufficiently presents the ability to consult lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and factual understanding of the processing against him, it implies that the individual is able to utilize knowledge to assist their lawyers and thus participate defense. Many mentally retarded defendants are unable to weigh options and make reasonable decisions regarding how to handle the case. The forensic clinician has to conduct a thorough, assessment and ask questions to evoke recitation of facts and also assesses a defendant’s rational understanding by asking. Criminal responsibility is ultimately determined by the court; however, forensic evaluators may offer clinical opinions regarding the extent to which mental retardation might affect a defendant’s ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of the crime committed. As committed mental retardation itself is not an adequate defense against a criminal act, yet, forensic evaluators can play a vital role by documenting specific deficits as they pertain to criminal offenses committed by mentally retarded defendants. A forensic report should address three main issues. First, a thorough review of the individual’s history with special attention paid to any signs of cognitive deficits or developmental delays noted prior to age 18. Second, an intelligence test should be used to assess the current intellectual deficits. A recent survey of forensic experts conducted by Lally (2003), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales – Third Edition (WAIS-III) was rated as a “recommended” or “acceptable” instrument to evaluate issues of competency and mental state at the time of offense. Third, the evaluation should include a measure of adaptive functioning, of which several are routinely used (e.g., Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales). Such instruments are typically completed by interviewing caregivers or relatives, which enables to rate the individual on a variety of functional domains. These ratings include some assessment of social functioning, communication skills, and daily living/self-care tasks. When mental retardation has been established historically or through current evaluation, the evaluator must explore specific deficits associated they relate to the legal question. If an individual meet the criteria for diagnosis of mental retardation and deficits in his “factual” and “rational” understanding
of the proceedings against him, a clear and supported clinical opinion can be given regarding how mental retardation might affect the individual’s competency to stand trial. A preliminary “screen” might include inability to read, write, tell time, or make change. Individuals having mental retardation are slow to respond to questions, inordinately quiet or unable to explain their actions in any detail. Historical indicators include special education placement, failure to hold a steady job, or lack of independent living. Mental retardation is a condition requiring cognitive and behavioral assessment, it is important that forensic evaluator conducting such assessments should have adequate training in clinical and the legal aspects of mental retardation. Ethical conduct requires forensic evaluators to be cautious of the limitations of psychological tests. Many widely used forensic instruments are not quite inappropriate for use with mentally retarded defendants, (Hurley and Deal, 2006). Few instruments have been specifically developed for evaluating competency issues with mentally retarded defendants. However, the CAST – MR (Competence Assessment for Standing Trial for Defendants with Mental Retardation) attempts to sidestep traditional problems inherent in evaluating mentally retarded defendants, which include language limitations, a focus on symptoms rather than concrete legal understanding, and an open-ended format that often yields inaccurate results (Everington, 1990). References American Association of Mental Retardation. (2002a). Mental Retardation: Definition, Classification, and Systems of Supports. 10 th ed. Annapolis, MD: Author. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders. IV-TR Fourth Edition (Text Revision), Washington, DC: Day, K. (1997). Clinical features and offensive behaviour of mentally retarded sex offenders: A review of research. The NADD Newsletter, 14, 86-89. Glick, M. and Zigler, E. (1995), Developmental differences in the symptomatology of psychiatric inpatients with and without mild mental retardation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 99(4), 407-417. Goldman, M. (2001). Systematic treatment of criminal offenders having developmental delay. The NADD Bulletin, 4(3), 56-57. Hill, B.K. and Bruinink, R.H. (1984). Maladaptive behavior of mentally retarded individuals in residential facilities. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 380-387. Hurley, K.E. and Deal, W.P. (2006) Assessment instruments measuring malingering used with individuals who have mental retardation. Potential problems and issues. Mental retardation,44(2),112-119. Kanaya, T., Scullin, M.H., and Ceci, S.J. (2003). The Flynn Effect and U.S. policies. American Psychologist, 58(10), 778-790. Kinsler, P.J., Saxman, A., and Fishman, D.B. (2004). The Vermont Defendant Accommodation project: A case study. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 10(1/2), 134-161.
Page 1 and 2: Continuing Clinical Psychology Educ
Page 3 and 4: PROGRAM SCHEDULE DAY 1 10-9-2011 Re
Page 5 and 6: Dr. T.R. Pachamuthu Chancellor, SRM
Page 7 and 8: Prof. P.Sathyanarayanan President,
Page 9 and 10: His Excellency Sir. Dr. M. Ponnavai
Page 11 and 12: Dr. M. Ganapathy Director Medical &
Page 13 and 14: Dr. Malavika Kapur President Indian
Page 15 and 16: K.Vijayan President, TNACP Tamil Na
Page 17 and 18: Mrs.V. Smitha Ruckmani Organizing S
Page 19: Srishti Special School For children
Page 22 and 23: CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY AND FORENSIC PS
Page 24 and 25: FORENSIC ISSUE OF MENTAL RETARDATIO
Page 28 and 29: Lally, S.J. (2003). What tests are
Page 30: Best Compliments From Symbiosis A d
Page 33 and 34: “Pebbles” is one of the leading
Page 35 and 36: With Best Compliments From Vijayaku
Page 37 and 38: HISTORY OF SRM 1968 - Mr. T.R. Pach
Page 40 and 41: GENESIS: M.S.Chellamuthu Trust and
Page 42 and 43: With Best Compliments from CARE FER

âForensic Clinical Psychology as an Emerging ... - SRM University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?

âForensic Clinical Psychology as an Emerging ... - SRM University