The Roles of Forensic Psychiatrists and Psychologists: Professional Experts, Service Providers, Therapists, or All Things for All People?
Forensic psychiatry and psychology in Europe place emphasis on clinical service delivery and the treatment of offenders with mental disorder while also working at all levels alongside the criminal justice system and other agencies. In this chapter, we first consider the various roles taken by forensic psychiatrists and, to an extent, other clinicians in the field. Secondly, we discuss the special impact of the psychologist on evaluation, management, and interventions, with support through systematic assessments and reproducable measurement of risk and change. Thirdly, we take the practitioner-expert witness tension as an example of the potential conflicts between the various roles which forensic psychiatrists and clinical psychologists must adopt, and how these may be resolved. Although these roles are strictly separated in some countries, decisions on how to act are not evidence-based, and it is arguable that the most important resolution lies in clarity for all parties on the nature and extent of roles and relationships. We go on to show that, even within an inquisitorial approach, there needs to be no strict separation between evaluation for legal purposes and therapy, using the Belgian social defense system as an illustration of this.
Thierry Pham’s contribution was made possible thanks to the financial support of the Ministère de la Région Wallonne, “Sante ́et Affaires Sociales et Egalité des chances” to the CRDS.
- 1.Taylor R, Yakeley J. Working with MAPPA: guidance for psychiatrists in England and Wales. 2013. https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/FR%20FP%2001%20-%20final2013.pdf
- 2.Wittmann W. Betreuung und Kontrolle von gefährlichen Straftätern: Prävention von Rückfällen. (Support and control of dangerous offenders: Prevention of relapses). Koln, Germany: Herausgeber; 2008.Google Scholar
- 4.Haward LRC. Forensic psychology. London: Batsford.1981Google Scholar
- 5.Haward LRC. (1990). A dictionary of forensic psychology. Chichester: Barry Rose.Google Scholar
- 6.Vivjoen JL, Roesch R, Ogloff JRP, Zapf PA. The role of Canadian psychologists in conducting fitness and criminal responsibility evaluations. Can Psychol. 2003;44(4):369–81.Google Scholar
- 8.Aitken C, Roberts P, Jackson G. Communicating and interpreting statistical evidence in the administration of criminal justice. 1. Fundamentals of probability and statistical evidence in criminal proceedings. Royal Statistical Society: London; 2010. http://www.rss.org.uk/Images/PDF/influencing-change/rss-fundamentals-probability-statistical-evidence.pdf.Google Scholar
- 10.Gudjonsson GH. The admissibility of expert psychological and psychiatric evidence in England and Wales. Crim Behav Mental Health. 1992;2:245–52.Google Scholar
- 11.Gudjonsson GH, Gunn J. The competence and reliability of a witness in a criminal court. Br J Psychiatry. 1982;141:624–7.Google Scholar
- 14.Ireland JL. Evaluating expert witness psychological reports: Exploring quality. 2012. http://www.mfjc.co.uk/home/mfjccou1/public_ftp/resources/FINALVERSIONFEB2012.pdfGoogle Scholar
- 15.Strasburger LH, Gutheil TG, Brodsky BA. On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154:448–56.Google Scholar
- 16.Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.Google Scholar
- 18.Large M, Nielssen O, Elliott G. The reliability of evidence about psychiatric diagnosis after serious crime: part II. Agreement between experts and treating practitioners. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2010;38:524–30.Google Scholar
- 19.CEDH, 9 janvier 2014, Saadouni c. Belgique, § 56 et 61.Google Scholar
- 20.CEDH, 3 février 2015, Smits e.a. c. Belgique, §74.Google Scholar
- 21.Englebert et al. La Défense Sociale (DS) en Belgique, une matière complexe qui mérite un vaste débat. Carte blanche. Le Soir, 22/10, p. 22. 2015.Google Scholar
- 22.Brown P. Ethical challenges to research in the criminal justice system. Crim Behav Mental Health. 2017.Google Scholar