Psychiatry and the death penalty: dilemma for mental health professionals.

Abstract

The arguments for and against mental health professionals' participation in death penalty proceedings are presented against the background of U.S. Supreme Court decisions which have had a bearing on this issue. It is concluded that the possibility of presenting mitigating psychologic testimony in such proceedings necessitates the possibility of exacerbating psychiatric testimony and that hence, mental health professionals who testify for the prosecution in such cases do not, on a wider view, violate their hippocratic oaths or other ethical codes. A number of safeguards, however, should be instituted with respect to such testimony. Psychiatrists, psychologists or other qualified mental health professionals should (1) testify with medical "possibility" or "probability," (2) not be permitted to address ultimate legal issues and (3) be permitted, in fact encouraged, to present alternative interpretations of forensic psychiatric findings. It is further argued that in addition to being justified in testifying for the prosecution on death penalty cases, mental health professionals may have a moral rationale for treating death row prisoners and restoring them to competency.