International Journal of Law and Psychiatry最新文献

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to increased psychological distress and far-reaching restrictions of freedom. In March 2020, Austrian penal authorities enacted various safety and protection measures to mitigate the propagation of COVID-19. While infection rates in penal institutions were low, restrictive conditions of detention limited the forensic care of offenders. This retrospective longitudinal observational study aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the psychosocial rehabilitation in forensic psychiatry.

Administrative and clinical data obtained from 97 males treated at an inpatient forensic mental health institution were compared before (January 2019 – mid-March 2020) and after (mid-March 2020 – May 2021) the enactment of pandemic-related restrictive measures. The study outcomes related to rehabilitative activities, social contacts, psychopathological stability, and compliance with institutional regulations.

During the pandemic, a decrease in individual one-day temporary releases (64 vs. 3, p < .001) and one-day group excursions (103 vs. 10, p < .001) was observed. Likewise, visits by relatives (1440 vs. 429, p < .001) and legal guardians (286 vs. 130, p = .009) decreased. Regarding compliance with institutional regulations, illegal activities decreased from 27 to 8 after enactment of restrictive measures (p = .024). In contrast, long-term temporary releases (122 vs. 188 weeks, p = .131) and admissions to the acute ward (141 vs. 143, p = .712) remained unchanged. Overall, this study demonstrates the substantial impact of COVID-19 on the psychosocial care of forensic psychiatric patients and implies the necessity for guidelines to uphold an appropriate standard of forensic rehabilitation during future pandemics.

This study aimed to assess the accuracy of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) diagnoses made by mental health experts in people reporting post-traumatic stress symptoms related to traffic accidents. Data were collected from sixty participants: 30 with possible traumatic experiences and 30 who had never experienced this or other types of traumatic events. Six professional diagnosticians examined the participants with Structured Clinical Interview for the Study of Axis I Disorders (SCID-I for DSM-IV-TR) in conditions similar to those typical of judicial cases related to traffic accident damage claims. There was no significant difference in the number of PTSD diagnoses between malingerers and non-malingerers. Some PTSD symptoms were more frequently recognized in malingerers. This study demonstrates that even professional diagnosticians with clinical and jurisprudence experience have significant difficulty identifying PTSD malingering. This difficulty can be linked to the limitations of diagnoses based on introspective reports.

Parole boards are often required to make many release recommendations after reviewing a substantial amount of information in a short timeframe. While making release decisions, parole board members might be motivated to sacrifice accuracy and, instead, use heuristics, such as their emotions. Emotions might increase the reliance on risk or threat related information, such as an inmate's mental illness status. The current study applies the appraisal tendency framework of emotion to assess the impact of emotion on parole decisions involving juvenile mental health diagnoses. Using a 3(emotion: anger, compassion, and control) x 4(mental illness: conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, depression, and control) factorial design, this study examined the extent to which mock parole board members' emotions impacted evaluations of inmates with juvenile mental illness diagnoses and subsequent release decisions. Results indicated that there was no effect of emotion on parole decisions. However, the inmates' mental illnesses did play a role in parole release decisions. Specifically, parole candidates with depression were released on parole at higher rates compared to conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and the control condition. Policy implications are discussed.

In the Brazilian penal system, a person with a mental disorder who commits an offense may be exempt from penalty if, at the time of the offense, they were entirely unable to understand the illicit character of the fact. A forensic psychiatric expert makes this determination and may also recommend to the magistrate the type of commitment to be applied. As a rule, this measure is stipulated based on the judge's sentence rather than the kind of treatment that the mental disorder requires. This difference motivates the present study that seeks to identify criteria for expertise. Additionally, this work focuses on the biopsychological method which influences the application of the measure as detailed in the expert's report. Expert reports have considerable importance in criminal proceedings and often influence determinations of the deadline for compliance and, potentially, hospitalisation. For this question, a scoping review searched for relevant literature, regardless of the study design. Of 1014 references, 27 answered the guiding question, giving rise to 10 categories with several items corresponding to the criteria for expertise. These items, although not exhaustive, demonstrated the deficient interrelationship between law and mental health due to the lack of communication and interaction between them the two. This could be addressed through interdisciplinary legislation or alteration of criminal and criminal procedural laws. Additionally, the lack of communication could be further addressed through the magistrate's interpretation of mental health laws as a new parameter for criminal law based on the human dignity principle which recognises fundamental human rights.

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate criminal outcomes of mentally disordered offenders in compulsory forensic psychiatric care during the year 2010 versus 2018. More specifically, we sought to identify the occurrence of new criminal sentences during ongoing treatment and possible factors associated with recidivistic criminality. Another aim was to map previous criminality, types of index crime, and whether there were any changes within this decade.

Methods

Crime-, clinical, and treatment-related variables were collected from the Swedish National Forensic Psychiatric Register for all unique inpatients registered from January 1–December 31 in 2010 (N = 717) and 2018 (N = 757). The mean, frequency, percentage, and standard deviation were calculated per variable and stratified by study year and gender. Between-group comparisons were made using t-tests and Chi-square tests. Binary logistic regression was performed to determine whether variables expected to be associated with recidivism showed any relation to criminal recidivism for each study cohort.

Results

Most patients were male and approximately one-quarter and one-half of the men, respectively, had a previous sentence for non-violent and violent crimes. The 2018 cohort showed significantly lower rates of sentences to forensic psychiatry with special court supervision although the numbers were low in both cohorts and for both men and women. Previous violent conviction was associated with criminal recidivism during treatment in 2010, while this was joined by index crime under the influence of alcohol/illicit drugs for the 2018 cohort.

Conclusions

Overall, these results showed more similarities between the 2010 and 2018 cohorts then dissimilarities, while on the other hand some quite substantial differences were described between males versus females. The results of this study indicate that it may be possible to tailor forensic psychiatric treatment to gender as a proxy for other variables related to increased criminal recidivism in offenders sentenced to forensic psychiatric care.

Background

Increasing freedom of movement and community reintegration is a vital part of recovery for forensic service users. Clinical teams realize that risk of unauthorized leave exists when granting leave, tasking them with balancing the recovery-based treatment needs of the patients with the larger obligation to protect the public from undue risk of harm. While considerable literature exists on unauthorized leave from acute psychiatric units, there is still little research specific to unauthorized leave from forensic settings.

Aims

The aim of this study is twofold. First, to examine the prevalence rates and characteristics of unauthorized leaves (i.e., absconds and escapes) among 654 high security forensic patients. Second, to identify individual patient factors associated with unauthorized leaves. A broad array of risk factors is taken into account, including demographic, clinical, judicial and criminal factors.

Principal results

During the 8-year period (17th of November 2014 until 17th of November 2022), there were 59 unauthorized leaves, which represents a very low percentage (0.2%) relative to the total number of leaves. Most patients returned to the hospital or were caught within one week. The reasons that led to an unauthorized leave were in more than half of the incidents frustration and in more than a third goal-directed. Only a minority of the unauthorized leaves was associated with subsequent offending, notwithstanding substance use was more frequent. Patients that absconded or escaped more often had a personality and comorbid substance misuse disorder, but less often a paraphilic disorder. They were younger, had more convictions and higher risk scores. After logistic regression, only personality disorder, comorbid substance misuse disorder and number of convictions were independently associated with unauthorized leave.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate that ULs occurred rarely, and in most instances, patients returned within a short period without further incidents. Personality disordered patients with comorbid substance misuse and prior convictions posed the greatest risk to abscond or escape. Overall, the rate of unauthorized leaves and subsequent offending was small relative to the total number of leaves. This suggests that the risk for absconding was assessed in an adequate manner by the clinical teams. The study hopefully adds to reducing the stigma towards leaves from forensic psychiatric hospitals.

In the era of on-going efforts to empower persons with mental illness to be independent decision makers as informed by the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability (CRPD), family members acting as substitute decision makers (SDM) for people suffering from disabling serious mental illness (SMI) remain an integral part of the medical-legal system in psychiatric care in many parts of the world, including Canada; yet their experiences and perspectives are rarely studied. This explorative qualitative study examines the lived experiences and reflections of 14 family member SDMs in Toronto, Canada. Five key themes related to being SDM emerged: 1) Varied subjective understanding of the responsibility and authority of the SDM role; 2) Varied role demands and impact on SDMs' lives; 3) Challenges in dealing with the mental health system; 4) Leveraging decision making status to promote patient care; and 5) SDM role impact on family relationships. The need to improve SDM understanding of their role, acknowledging their value and care-taker burden, finding a balance for their involvement, and improving their support in efforts to enhance care for the patients are discussed.

On 25 June 2021, the Law on Euthanasia in Spain came into force, providing for two modes of helping an individual end their life: euthanasia and/or medically assisted suicide. Among the requisites that a request for euthanasia has to fulfil are that the individual must be suffering a severe, chronic and debilitating condition or a severe and incurable disease, at the same time as that person shows the necessary competence to decide. The possibility exists that a patient suffering mental health problems submits such a request; however, the specific characteristics of a mental health disorder make such a request considerably more complex. In this article, based on a narrative review of the law itself and the related literature, the requisites established under the law are analysed from an ethical-legal perspective with the aim of defining when a request for euthanasia from a person with a mental health disorder may be deemed legitimate and in line with legal provisions. This should help clinicians make rational, reasoned decisions when dealing with a request of this type.