Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.220098-22
Jacob M Appel
Involuntary civil commitment for individuals who are chronically impaired as a result of their substance use remains highly controversial. At present, 37 states have legalized this practice. Increasingly, states are allowing private third-parties, such as friends or relatives of the patient, to petition courts for involuntary treatment. One such approach, modeled on Florida's Marchman Act, does not determine status based on the petitioning party's willingness to commit to pay for care. In contrast, Kentucky's approach, widely known as "Casey's Law," predicates such involuntary commitment on the third party's willingness to commit in advance to pay for the patient's treatment. This article reviews the history and current status of existing law on this subject and then argues that psychiatrists should advocate strongly against involuntary substance treatment laws that rely upon third-party pledges of payment.
{"title":"Financial Equity in Involuntary Treatment for Substance Use Disorders.","authors":"Jacob M Appel","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.220098-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.220098-22","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Involuntary civil commitment for individuals who are chronically impaired as a result of their substance use remains highly controversial. At present, 37 states have legalized this practice. Increasingly, states are allowing private third-parties, such as friends or relatives of the patient, to petition courts for involuntary treatment. One such approach, modeled on Florida's Marchman Act, does not determine status based on the petitioning party's willingness to commit to pay for care. In contrast, Kentucky's approach, widely known as \"Casey's Law,\" predicates such involuntary commitment on the third party's willingness to commit in advance to pay for the patient's treatment. This article reviews the history and current status of existing law on this subject and then argues that psychiatrists should advocate strongly against involuntary substance treatment laws that rely upon third-party pledges of payment.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"357-366"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10139512","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.220110-22
Stephanie R Penney, Roy Ulrich, Margaret Maheandiran
This study investigates the predictive validity of two risk instruments for stalking, the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM) and the Stalking Risk Profile (SRP), in a sample of 86 forensic psychiatric patients. We compare these tools against a well-validated violence risk assessment measure (Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-20, Version 3 (HCR-20V3)) for violent and stalking-related outcomes. Dynamic (mutable) components of each tool were rated at three annual intervals and revealed significant change across time. The HCR-20V3, SAM, and SRP measures showed comparable ability to classify those who recidivated with further stalking from those who did not (area under the curves = .72-.73, P <001). Time-varying scores from the dynamic subscales of the HCR-20V3 and SAM contributed significantly to the prediction of stalking, whereas nonstalking violence was primarily forecast by the static (Historical) scale of the HCR-20V3. This suggests comparable validity of general violence and stalking risk tools for assessing the risk of stalking in forensic patients. Stalking-specific risk factors on the SAM and SRP will likely be of added clinical value in terms of tailoring risk management and treatment plans. Findings also emphasize the importance of attending to changes in risk status over time and incorporating time-sensitive methodologies into predictive models.
本研究以86名法医精神病患者为样本，研究了跟踪行为评估与管理指南(SAM)和跟踪行为风险概况(SRP)两种风险工具对跟踪行为的预测效度。我们将这些工具与经过充分验证的暴力风险评估措施(历史、临床、风险管理20，第3版(HCR-20V3))进行比较，以确定暴力和跟踪相关的结果。每隔三年对每个工具的动态(可变)组件进行评级，并显示出随时间的显著变化。HCR-20V3、SAM和SRP测量显示，将那些再次跟踪的人与那些没有再跟踪的人进行分类的能力相当(曲线下面积= 0.72 -)。73, p . 001)。HCR-20V3的动态分量表和SAM的时变分数对跟踪行为的预测有显著贡献，而HCR-20V3的静态(历史)分量表主要预测非跟踪暴力行为。这表明一般暴力和跟踪风险工具在评估法医患者跟踪风险方面具有相当的有效性。SAM和SRP上的跟踪特定风险因素可能在定制风险管理和治疗计划方面具有附加的临床价值。研究结果还强调了关注风险状态随时间变化的重要性，并将对时间敏感的方法纳入预测模型。
{"title":"An Examination of Predictive Validity and Change in Risk Factors for Stalking over Time.","authors":"Stephanie R Penney, Roy Ulrich, Margaret Maheandiran","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.220110-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.220110-22","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigates the predictive validity of two risk instruments for stalking, the Guidelines for Stalking Assessment and Management (SAM) and the Stalking Risk Profile (SRP), in a sample of 86 forensic psychiatric patients. We compare these tools against a well-validated violence risk assessment measure (Historical, Clinical, Risk Management-20, Version 3 (HCR-20V3)) for violent and stalking-related outcomes. Dynamic (mutable) components of each tool were rated at three annual intervals and revealed significant change across time. The HCR-20V3, SAM, and SRP measures showed comparable ability to classify those who recidivated with further stalking from those who did not (area under the curves = .72-.73, <i>P</i> <<i> </i>001). Time-varying scores from the dynamic subscales of the HCR-20V3 and SAM contributed significantly to the prediction of stalking, whereas nonstalking violence was primarily forecast by the static (Historical) scale of the HCR-20V3. This suggests comparable validity of general violence and stalking risk tools for assessing the risk of stalking in forensic patients. Stalking-specific risk factors on the SAM and SRP will likely be of added clinical value in terms of tailoring risk management and treatment plans. Findings also emphasize the importance of attending to changes in risk status over time and incorporating time-sensitive methodologies into predictive models.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"377-389"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10148690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23
J. Cohn, Jennifer Karlin
dominant cause of mental injury. The court also concluded that the Commission did not err by affirming the Board’s denial of a SIME. Additionally, the court ruled that the Board’s exclusion of parts ofMs.Magestro’s testimony was not prejudicial, particularly because Ms. Magestro conceded she was unqualified to offer diagnoses.Ms. Patterson was permitted to present other opinions by qualified experts, yet the Board assigned more weight to the opposing expert.
{"title":"Forensic Practitioner Testimony and Jury Instructions Involving Insanity Defense","authors":"J. Cohn, Jennifer Karlin","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230066L1-23","url":null,"abstract":"dominant cause of mental injury. The court also concluded that the Commission did not err by affirming the Board’s denial of a SIME. Additionally, the court ruled that the Board’s exclusion of parts ofMs.Magestro’s testimony was not prejudicial, particularly because Ms. Magestro conceded she was unqualified to offer diagnoses.Ms. Patterson was permitted to present other opinions by qualified experts, yet the Board assigned more weight to the opposing expert.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"442 - 444"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46987525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230066L2-23
Mia M. Ricardo, Nathan Frommer
medical or psychological terms” (Toolan, p 683). Ultimately, the court found that Dr. Kelly’s testimony was permissible, because he only briefly mentioned the legal definition and then reframed his answer on objection. Second, Mr. Toolan asserted that the judge did not sufficiently explain the difference between a lack of criminal responsibility (based on mental disease or defect) and diminished capacity (based on mental impairment), and that the jury may have assumed that they cannot find that the defendant had a diminished capacity if he was criminally responsible. The court ruled that the judge’s instructions were adequate, as he presented the two concepts as two separate factors to consider. Further, in this case, the court found that the evidence regarding premeditation was so strong that any confusion was unlikely to lead to error. Finally, Mr. Toolan contended that the jury should have been instructed to consider Mr. Toolan’s inability to resist the urge to use drugs and alcohol, even if he knew the effect it would have on his mental state. He argued that this further instruction should have been given when the jury received instruction that a defendant who voluntarily uses substances, knowing the effect it would have on an existing mental disease or defect, is still criminally responsible. In affirming the convictions, the court acknowledged that the science previously relied on no longer reflects the current understanding of addiction and how it may affect a person’s urges to use drugs or alcohol. The court determined, however, that Mr. Toolan’s conduct was knowing and intentional and, therefore, did not meet the criteria for insanity.
{"title":"Mental Health as Mitigation Evidence","authors":"Mia M. Ricardo, Nathan Frommer","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230066L2-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230066L2-23","url":null,"abstract":"medical or psychological terms” (Toolan, p 683). Ultimately, the court found that Dr. Kelly’s testimony was permissible, because he only briefly mentioned the legal definition and then reframed his answer on objection. Second, Mr. Toolan asserted that the judge did not sufficiently explain the difference between a lack of criminal responsibility (based on mental disease or defect) and diminished capacity (based on mental impairment), and that the jury may have assumed that they cannot find that the defendant had a diminished capacity if he was criminally responsible. The court ruled that the judge’s instructions were adequate, as he presented the two concepts as two separate factors to consider. Further, in this case, the court found that the evidence regarding premeditation was so strong that any confusion was unlikely to lead to error. Finally, Mr. Toolan contended that the jury should have been instructed to consider Mr. Toolan’s inability to resist the urge to use drugs and alcohol, even if he knew the effect it would have on his mental state. He argued that this further instruction should have been given when the jury received instruction that a defendant who voluntarily uses substances, knowing the effect it would have on an existing mental disease or defect, is still criminally responsible. In affirming the convictions, the court acknowledged that the science previously relied on no longer reflects the current understanding of addiction and how it may affect a person’s urges to use drugs or alcohol. The court determined, however, that Mr. Toolan’s conduct was knowing and intentional and, therefore, did not meet the criteria for insanity.","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"444 - 446"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47705865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230067L1-23
Amber Boutwell, D. Kelly
{"title":"Posttraumatic Stress Disorder as Compensable Occupational Disease","authors":"Amber Boutwell, D. Kelly","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230067L1-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230067L1-23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"448 - 450"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43003390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230055-23
T. Botello, B. Gross, L. Weinberger
{"title":"Seymour Pollack, MD, MA","authors":"T. Botello, B. Gross, L. Weinberger","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230055-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230055-23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"326 - 328"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69707361","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.220096-22
Oluwatoyin Ashekun, Adria Zern, Stephanie Langlois, Michael T Compton
Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are linked to both poor mental health and adverse social outcomes, including arrest and incarceration. Furthermore, individuals with serious mental illnesses (SMI) are known to have high rates of childhood adversity and are overrepresented in all facets of the criminal justice system. Few studies have examined the associations between ACEs and arrests among individuals with SMI. We examined the impact of ACEs on arrest among individuals with SMI while controlling for age, gender, race, and educational attainment. In a combined sample from two separate studies in different settings (N = 539), we hypothesized that ACE scores would be associated with prior arrest, as well as rate of arrests. The prevalence of prior arrest was very high (415, 77.3%) and was predicted by male gender, African American race, lower educational attainment, and mood disorder diagnosis. Arrest rate (number of arrests per decade, which thus accounted for age) was predicted by lower educational attainment and higher ACE score. Diverse clinical and policy implications include improving educational outcomes for individuals with SMI, reducing and addressing childhood maltreatment and other forms of childhood or adolescent adversity, and clinical approaches that help clients reduce the likelihood of arrest while addressing trauma histories.
{"title":"Adverse Childhood Experiences and Arrest Rates among Individuals with Serious Mental Illnesses.","authors":"Oluwatoyin Ashekun, Adria Zern, Stephanie Langlois, Michael T Compton","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.220096-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.220096-22","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are linked to both poor mental health and adverse social outcomes, including arrest and incarceration. Furthermore, individuals with serious mental illnesses (SMI) are known to have high rates of childhood adversity and are overrepresented in all facets of the criminal justice system. Few studies have examined the associations between ACEs and arrests among individuals with SMI. We examined the impact of ACEs on arrest among individuals with SMI while controlling for age, gender, race, and educational attainment. In a combined sample from two separate studies in different settings (<i>N</i> = 539), we hypothesized that ACE scores would be associated with prior arrest, as well as rate of arrests. The prevalence of prior arrest was very high (415, 77.3%) and was predicted by male gender, African American race, lower educational attainment, and mood disorder diagnosis. Arrest rate (number of arrests per decade, which thus accounted for age) was predicted by lower educational attainment and higher ACE score. Diverse clinical and policy implications include improving educational outcomes for individuals with SMI, reducing and addressing childhood maltreatment and other forms of childhood or adolescent adversity, and clinical approaches that help clients reduce the likelihood of arrest while addressing trauma histories.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 3","pages":"329-336"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10148130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230068-23
Jason R Pickett, Bruce M. Cohen
requiring proof that prison officials knew of, but disregarded, an excessive risk to the inmate. Accordingly, Mr. Clark was required to allege adequately that prison officials had a sufficiently culpable state of mind. Mr. Clark had asserted that the prison officials had known about his history of significant mental illness and yet had disregarded his pleas to leave the SHU, leaving him there for seven months and causing his mental health to deteriorate. The court concluded that Mr. Clark’s allegations, that prison officials were deliberately indifferent as to the effects of prolonged isolation on Mr. Clark’s already severely compromised mental health, were sufficient to raise a legitimate Eighth Amendment claim. Finally, the Third Circuit addressed the legitimacy of the district court’s ruling that no established law had been violated during the seven months Mr. Clark spent in the SHU. To meet this subjective standard, the prison officials must have had “fair warning” that their conduct violated the prisoner’s Eighth Amendment right. To address this question, the court reviewed its own precedents, relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and multiple federal circuit court decisions with related fact patterns. In these decisions, the Third Circuit noted that the knowing infliction of serious psychological injury, by whatever means, had consistently grounded Eighth Amendment violation claims. The court also relied on Cmty. Legal Aid Soc’y Inc. v. Coupe, 2016 WL 1055741 (D. Del. 2016), a decision handed down by a Delaware district court when Mr. Clark had been in the SHU for two months. In this decision, the district court ruled that Commissioner Coupe’s alleged conduct of “placing mentally ill inmates in solitary confinement, without adequate mental health treatment and out-of-cell time, raised a viable constitutional claim” (Cmty Legal Aid, p 2). The court also cited a Delaware statute, which was in effect at the time of Mr. Clark’s solitary confinement, preventing courts from imposing a term of solitary confinement for more than three months. The court concluded that the law, along with other sources of notice, sufficiently “warned prison officials that their purported conduct was unlawful” (Clark , p 188). The Third Circuit held that the district court’s grant of qualified immunity was premature, reversed the district court’s order dismissing the conditions of confinement claim, and remanded the case for further proceedings. Discussion
要求证明监狱官员知道，但忽视了囚犯的过度危险。因此，克拉克先生被要求充分指控监狱官员有足够有罪的心理状态。Clark先生声称，监狱官员知道他有严重的精神疾病史，但却无视他离开禁闭室的请求，将他留在那里七个月，导致他的精神健康恶化。法院的结论是，Clark先生的指控，即监狱官员故意对长期隔离对Clark先生已经严重受损的精神健康的影响漠不关心，足以提出第八修正案的合法主张。最后，第三巡回法院对地区法院的裁决进行了合法性的讨论，该裁决认为，在克拉克先生被关禁闭的七个月期间，没有违反任何既定法律。为了满足这一主观标准，监狱官员必须得到“公平警告”，即他们的行为违反了第八修正案赋予囚犯的权利。为了解决这个问题，最高法院审查了自己的判例、相关的美国最高法院判决，以及多个联邦巡回法院判决的相关事实模式。在这些判决中，第三巡回法院指出，无论以何种方式故意造成严重的心理伤害，始终是违反第八修正案的主张的依据。法院也依赖于Cmty。Legal Aid Soc 'y Inc.诉Coupe案，2016年WL 1055741 (D. Del. 2016)，这是特拉华州地方法院在Clark先生被关禁闭两个月时作出的裁决。在这一决定中，地区法院裁定，Coupe专员涉嫌“将精神病囚犯单独监禁，没有给予充分的精神健康治疗和牢房外时间，这一行为提出了切实可行的宪法主张”(《Cmty法律援助》第2页)。法院还引用了特拉华州的一项法规，该法规在克拉克先生被单独监禁时有效，禁止法院判处单独监禁期限超过三个月。法院的结论是，法律连同其他通知来源已充分“警告监狱官员他们所声称的行为是非法的”(Clark，第188页)。第三巡回法院认为，地区法院给予有条件豁免为时过早，撤销了地区法院驳回禁闭条件要求的命令，并将该案发回进一步诉讼。讨论
{"title":"Due Process for Civil Commitment Proceedings","authors":"Jason R Pickett, Bruce M. Cohen","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230068-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230068-23","url":null,"abstract":"requiring proof that prison officials knew of, but disregarded, an excessive risk to the inmate. Accordingly, Mr. Clark was required to allege adequately that prison officials had a sufficiently culpable state of mind. Mr. Clark had asserted that the prison officials had known about his history of significant mental illness and yet had disregarded his pleas to leave the SHU, leaving him there for seven months and causing his mental health to deteriorate. The court concluded that Mr. Clark’s allegations, that prison officials were deliberately indifferent as to the effects of prolonged isolation on Mr. Clark’s already severely compromised mental health, were sufficient to raise a legitimate Eighth Amendment claim. Finally, the Third Circuit addressed the legitimacy of the district court’s ruling that no established law had been violated during the seven months Mr. Clark spent in the SHU. To meet this subjective standard, the prison officials must have had “fair warning” that their conduct violated the prisoner’s Eighth Amendment right. To address this question, the court reviewed its own precedents, relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and multiple federal circuit court decisions with related fact patterns. In these decisions, the Third Circuit noted that the knowing infliction of serious psychological injury, by whatever means, had consistently grounded Eighth Amendment violation claims. The court also relied on Cmty. Legal Aid Soc’y Inc. v. Coupe, 2016 WL 1055741 (D. Del. 2016), a decision handed down by a Delaware district court when Mr. Clark had been in the SHU for two months. In this decision, the district court ruled that Commissioner Coupe’s alleged conduct of “placing mentally ill inmates in solitary confinement, without adequate mental health treatment and out-of-cell time, raised a viable constitutional claim” (Cmty Legal Aid, p 2). The court also cited a Delaware statute, which was in effect at the time of Mr. Clark’s solitary confinement, preventing courts from imposing a term of solitary confinement for more than three months. The court concluded that the law, along with other sources of notice, sufficiently “warned prison officials that their purported conduct was unlawful” (Clark , p 188). The Third Circuit held that the district court’s grant of qualified immunity was premature, reversed the district court’s order dismissing the conditions of confinement claim, and remanded the case for further proceedings. Discussion","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"452 - 454"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41910970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230066-23
Lauren J. Ryan, Danielle Rynczak
{"title":"Mental Injury Worker’s Compensation Claims","authors":"Lauren J. Ryan, Danielle Rynczak","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230066-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230066-23","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"440 - 442"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44132337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.230073-23
Parental Alienation: Science and Law was edited by Demosthenes Lorandos, PhD, JD, and William Bernet, MD. There are 14 other individual authors. The book comprises 13 chapters divided into two larger sections. Section One, consisting of six chapters, is titled “Clinical Considerations and Research.” Section Two, consisting of the remaining chapters, is titled “Legal Issues.” The purpose of Parental Alienation: Science and Law is to provide a thorough analysis and history of parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome. In conjunction, editors and contributors articulate potential solutions to address this psychological phenomenon adequately. Parental alienation (PA) theory has gained traction in the United States and internationally, with early references dating back to English common law in 1804. The book’s authors define the concept as a mental condition in which a child allies strongly with one parent while rejecting the other parent without legitimate cause. Emphasis is placed on the last portion of the definition, “without legitimate cause.” If there is evidence of abuse or neglect from the nonpreferred parent, the more appropriate term is parental estrangement. This distinction is crucial when determining the best course of action regarding the psychological and physical well-being of the child. Although many attorneys and mental health professionals recognize PA as a form of psychological abuse and parental alienation syndrome as a mental condition, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) does not recognize PA as a diagnosis, and introduction of PA concepts in courtroom proceedings is subject to expert witness scrutiny. The authors of Parental Alienation: Science and Law cite multiple studies measuring alienating behaviors in children and by parents or caregivers. The authors outline specific psychological consequences of parental alienation, such as higher incidences of depression and personality disorder pathologies. Additionally, the text’s authors criticize the adversarial family court system, which they argue increases the propensity for parental alienation. Finally, in the chapter titled “Public Policy Initiatives Related to Parental Alienation,” the authors recommend solutions to reduce parental alienation cases within the United States. The text’s authors provide readers with an in-depth analysis of the five-factor model, a tool to structure the investigation and assessment of parental alienation (not to be confused with the five-factor model of personality assessment). The five-factor model of parental alienation syndrome consists of the following five components: contact refusal by the child; the presence of a prior positive relationship between the child and the rejected parent; the absence of abuse or neglect by the rejected parent; the use of multiple alienating behaviors on the part of the favored parent; and the child’s exhibiting several of the behavioral manifestations of al
{"title":"Parental Alienation: Science and Law","authors":"","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.230073-23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.230073-23","url":null,"abstract":"Parental Alienation: Science and Law was edited by Demosthenes Lorandos, PhD, JD, and William Bernet, MD. There are 14 other individual authors. The book comprises 13 chapters divided into two larger sections. Section One, consisting of six chapters, is titled “Clinical Considerations and Research.” Section Two, consisting of the remaining chapters, is titled “Legal Issues.” The purpose of Parental Alienation: Science and Law is to provide a thorough analysis and history of parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome. In conjunction, editors and contributors articulate potential solutions to address this psychological phenomenon adequately. Parental alienation (PA) theory has gained traction in the United States and internationally, with early references dating back to English common law in 1804. The book’s authors define the concept as a mental condition in which a child allies strongly with one parent while rejecting the other parent without legitimate cause. Emphasis is placed on the last portion of the definition, “without legitimate cause.” If there is evidence of abuse or neglect from the nonpreferred parent, the more appropriate term is parental estrangement. This distinction is crucial when determining the best course of action regarding the psychological and physical well-being of the child. Although many attorneys and mental health professionals recognize PA as a form of psychological abuse and parental alienation syndrome as a mental condition, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) does not recognize PA as a diagnosis, and introduction of PA concepts in courtroom proceedings is subject to expert witness scrutiny. The authors of Parental Alienation: Science and Law cite multiple studies measuring alienating behaviors in children and by parents or caregivers. The authors outline specific psychological consequences of parental alienation, such as higher incidences of depression and personality disorder pathologies. Additionally, the text’s authors criticize the adversarial family court system, which they argue increases the propensity for parental alienation. Finally, in the chapter titled “Public Policy Initiatives Related to Parental Alienation,” the authors recommend solutions to reduce parental alienation cases within the United States. The text’s authors provide readers with an in-depth analysis of the five-factor model, a tool to structure the investigation and assessment of parental alienation (not to be confused with the five-factor model of personality assessment). The five-factor model of parental alienation syndrome consists of the following five components: contact refusal by the child; the presence of a prior positive relationship between the child and the rejected parent; the absence of abuse or neglect by the rejected parent; the use of multiple alienating behaviors on the part of the favored parent; and the child’s exhibiting several of the behavioral manifestations of al","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":"51 1","pages":"462 - 463"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45439175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号