Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law最新文献

Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) has strong evidence in support of its effectiveness in reducing suicide attempts, anger, impulsivity, and substance abuse. It has been implemented in a variety of forensic settings to help with these challenges, despite limited research on the efficacy of DBT within this population. The current study presents treatment outcomes from an established DBT program in a maximum-security forensic facility. Outcomes included self-reported functioning, behavioral outcomes, and assessment of DBT skills knowledge among inpatients who participated in either comprehensive DBT or DBT skills training. Behaviorally, the study found a significant decrease in rates of patient assaults and reduced use of "Pro re nata" (PRN) medication for anxiety or agitation over the course of DBT treatment. During the first six months of treatment, self-reported symptoms of depression, emotional and behavioral dysregulation, and psychological inflexibility significantly decreased. Within this time frame, patients also displayed a significant decrease in the use of dysfunctional coping skills and a significant increase in knowledge pertaining to emotion regulation and interpersonal effectiveness. The results of this study largely support the use of DBT in forensic settings.

Forensic psychiatrists may be asked to opine on neurological evidence or neurological diseases outside the scope of their expertise. This article discusses the value of involving experts trained in behavioral neurology in such cases. First, we describe the field of behavioral neurology and neuropsychiatry, the subspecialty available to both neurologists and psychiatrists focused on the behavioral, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric manifestations of neurological diseases. Next, we discuss the added value of behavioral neurologists in forensic cases, including assisting in the diagnostic evaluation for complex neuropsychiatric diseases, using expertise in localization to provide a strong scientific basis for linking neurodiagnostic testing to relevant neuropsychiatric symptoms, and assisting in relating these symptoms to the relevant legal question in cases where such symptoms may be less familiar to forensic psychiatrists, such as frontal lobe syndromes. We discuss approaches to integrating behavioral neurology with forensic psychiatry, highlighting the need for collaboration and mentorship between disciplines. Finally, we discuss several forensic cases highlighting the additional value of experts trained in behavioral neurology. We conclude that forensic psychiatrists should involve behavioral neurology experts when encountering neurological evidence that falls outside their scope of expertise, and the need for further cross-disciplinary collaboration and training.

Laws on competency to stand trial and fitness to plead are said to derive from "mute by visitation of God," a medieval English legal term referring to the inability to speak through no fault of one's own. The paper describes the relevant historical background, illustrative cases, and legal commentaries. Muteness by visitation of God arose to address a particular set of difficulties caused by the need to have medieval defendants agree to be tried. Competency to stand trial and fitness to plead, on the other hand, arose to address more general and enduring concerns, that putting people on trial when they were unable to understand or participate compromised the dignity and fairness of criminal proceedings. The origins of competency to stand trial and fitness to plead do not lie in medieval English attempts to persuade silent defendants to speak. They warrant their own historical exegesis.

There is a clear need for experts with the requisite knowledge and experience to offer medicolegal opinions pertaining to various neuropsychiatric conditions. There is also an important distinction between clinical and medicolegal roles, and the need for training and expertise applicable to forensic assessment. But there remain few available experts with credentials spanning neuropsychiatry and forensic assessment. This creates a dilemma whereby parties involved in litigation featuring neuropsychiatric illness or injury are frequently forced to choose between experts with either knowledge and skills applicable to neuropsychiatric conditions or experts with skills and experience applicable to forensic assessment. Either choice introduces risk. Whether flawed medicolegal opinions are a consequence of deficient medical knowledge or an inadequate forensic evaluation process, the result remains the same, with triers of fact potentially being exposed to problematic testimony. There is, however, a more fundamental problem that implicates patient care more broadly: spurious dichotomies created by the historical segregation of psychiatry and neurology. Optimizing clinical care for patients with neuropsychiatric conditions, improving medical education in support of such care, and enabling forensic neuropsychiatric assessment must then start with more proactive efforts to reintegrate psychiatry and neurology.

Competent forensic practice has required continued training and professional practice in differentiating between genuine and malingered presentations, especially within the spectrum of psychotic disorders. Historically, practitioners valued racial, ethnic, and cultural differences but often considered them as peripheral matters. In contemporary forensic practice, however, language and culture play preponderant roles. This commentary is focused on core features of malingering via a cultural lens. Three core, race-informed principles, such as biases against the African American Language, are highlighted and discussed. Related subjects for forensic practice include relevant clinical constructs such as malingering bias and "imposed etics," specifically, the imposition of mainstream values and discounting of cultural differences.

Empirical research is foundational to the discipline of forensic psychiatry. Candilis and Parker provide a cogent systematic review of the empirical literature on restoration of competence to stand trial using National Institutes of Health quality metrics. Components of the study methodology are highlighted, as they represent current best practices for conducting a systematic review. A discussion of strategies to increase empirical research uptake in forensic psychiatry is pursued alongside concrete examples of how the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Research Committee can help facilitate this goal.

A systematic review of the literature on restoration of competence to stand trial identified a predominance of retrospective case studies using descriptive and correlational statistics. Guided by National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality metrics and emphasizing study design, sample size, and statistical methods, the authors categorized a large majority of studies as fair in quality, underscoring the need for controlled designs, larger representative samples, and more sophisticated statistical analyses. Implications for the state of forensic research include the need to use large databases within jurisdictions and the importance of reliable methods that can be applied across jurisdictions and aggregated for meta-analysis. More sophisticated research methods can be advanced in forensic fellowship training where coordinated projects and curricula can encourage systematic approaches to forensic research.

Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia have enacted Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) statutes, which allow temporary removal of firearms from individuals who pose an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. Connecticut was the first state to enact such a law in 1999. The law's implementation and use between 1999 and 2013 were previously described, finding that ERPOs were pursued rarely for the first decade and that most orders were issued in response to concerns about suicide or self-harm rather than about interpersonal violence. The current study analyzes over 1,400 ERPOs in Connecticut between 2013 and 2020 in several domains: respondent demographics, circumstances leading to ERPO filing, type of threat (suicide, violence to others, or both), number and type of firearms removed, prevalence of mental illness and drug and alcohol use, and legal outcomes. Results are similar to the earlier study, indicating that ERPO respondents in Connecticut are primarily White, male, middle-aged residents of small towns and suburbs who pose a risk of harm to themselves (67.9%) more often than to others (42.8%). Significant gender differences between ERPO respondents are discussed, as are state-specific trends over time and differences between Connecticut and other states with published ERPO data.

The care and housing of transgender (TGD) incarcerated persons is a complex concern that is growing because of the increased recognition and diagnosis of gender dysphoria in society. To remain current in this evolving landscape, there have been updates to federal manuals and state guidelines regarding the medical care and housing of the TGD population. Since the publication by Glezer and colleagues in 2013, there has not been a comprehensive overview of current federal and state guidelines, and legal and other considerations on this topic. We provide an update with special consideration given to housing practices, safety, and access to care. A review of the literature shows that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) standards and Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) requirements are not uniformly implemented and enforced on a state level. In fact, some states have policies that are in direct conflict with federal requirements. The safety and equitable treatment of both TGD and cisgender populations is an important topic that merits attention. As new challenges emerge, an increase in federal enforcement and consistency is needed to ensure the humane treatment and protection of TGD inmates.