Teaching forensic psychiatry in Europe

Reducing Risk for Future Violence From Forensic Psychiatric Patients by Using Critical Factors of the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability as a Caring Tool

BACKGROUND

The dual task for forensic mental health care is community protection and treatment of mental disorders. The Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) has become an established tool for risk assessment and care planning in forensic psychiatry. When using the START, items judged as critical factors are chosen to be addressed in the care plan. However, it is not known which critical factors that are of special interest need to be addressed to reduce the risk for future violence.

AIMS

The main aim of this study was to explore how staff's choice of critical factors in the care planning influences risk for future violence.

METHODS

The study is based on 787 START assessments from 285 convicted and involuntary admitted inpatients at the Forensic Psychiatric Clinic of Stockholm County, Sweden. The influence on risk for future violence by selecting a certain item as a critical factor in the care plan was measured by comparing patients' sum of vulnerabilities at the time this certain critical factor was selected with this sum at the next assessment.

RESULTS

The results show that a patient's overall risk for future violence decreases significantly when the items "insight," "attitudes," "mental state," "coping," and "drug use" were addressed as critical factors in the care planning. The importance of specified critical factors differs between diagnostic groups and time after admission.

CONCLUSIONS

When staff select certain specified items as critical factors in the care planning, the patients' risk of relapse into acts of violence was significantly reduced.

Criminal responsibility evaluations: Benchmarking in different countries

Forensic mental health experts play a crucial role in criminal responsibility evaluations. However, the quality of these assessments has at time come under scrutiny and has been heavily criticized. A literature review revealed significant differences between countries concerning legal frameworks and procedures for conducting these assessments. The findings suggest that although some countries can be seen as a "role model", there still is room for improvement.

What does impartiality mean in medico-legal psychiatry? An international survey

Medico-legal psychiatry is the field of forensic psychiatry that consists of reporting to criminal, civil and administrative authorities and testifying in courts of law. As a forensic science, medico-legal psychiatry is based on the principle of impartiality. However, the notion of impartiality is not clearly defined and can be understood in many different ways. The purpose of this study was to explore the meaning that expert psychiatrists attribute to this notion. Members of the forensic sections of the World Psychiatric Association, the European Psychiatric Association and the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law were surveyed by e-mail using a vignette and a questionnaire. One hundred and thirty-one responses were received. When commenting on the case presented in the vignette, a large majority of respondents considered that the personal moral convictions of the doctor were the main factor likely to cast doubt on the impartiality of the expert, followed by past personal experience and the fact that the expert was the treating doctor of the examinee. In the answers to the questionnaire, 54% of participants considered that the question of impartiality was similar in both the inquisitorial and adversarial systems. Impartiality was considered by most participants as both an ethical and a legal concept. The main factors considered as likely to affect the impartiality of an expert were past personal experience, personal beliefs and perceptions, and the fact that the expert was the treating doctor of the examinee. Training in forensic psychiatry and past professional experience were considered to be the most important factors that could enhance the impartiality of an expert. When asked about their own definition, 70% of respondents defined impartiality as a choice specific to the expert, and 27% of participants defined impartiality as a result of external factors. The term 'objectivity' was used in 30% of responses. Results revealed a rather unified view of the issue of impartiality by medico-legal psychiatrists, irrespective of their country and practice conditions. The notions of honesty and striving for objectivity, which are emphasized in several guidelines of forensic psychiatry associations, were cited by many participants. Impartiality appears to be considered as a coherent concept in both normative and consequentialist ethics and represents a useful reference in the practice of medico-legal psychiatry.

Forensic psychiatry, one subspecialty with two ethics? A systematic review

Background

Forensic psychiatry is a particular subspecialty within psychiatry, dedicated in applying psychiatric knowledge and psychiatric training for particular legal purposes. Given that within the scope of forensic psychiatry, a third party usually intervenes in the patient-doctor relationship, an amendment of the traditional ethical principles seems justified.

Results

Thus, 47 articles, two book chapters and the guidelines produced by the World Psychiatric Association, the American Association of Psychiatry and the Law, as well as by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of psychiatrists, were analyzed. The review revealed that the ethics of correctional forensic psychiatry and those of legal forensic psychiatry do not markedly differ from each other, but they are incongruent in terms of implementation.

Methods

In an effort to better understand which ethical principles apply to forensic psychiatry, a chronological review of the literature published from 1950 to 2015 was carried out.

Conclusion

The ethics of correctional forensic psychiatry are primarily deontological. The principle of justice translates into the principle of health care equivalence, the principle of beneficence into providing the best possible care to patients, and the principle of respect of autonomy into ensuring confidentiality and informed consent. The ethics of legal forensic psychiatry are rather consequentialist. In this latter setting, the principle of justice is mainly characterized by professionalism, the principle of beneficence by objectivity and impartiality, and the principle of respect of autonomy by informed consent. However, these two distinct fields of forensic psychiatry share in common the principle of non maleficence, defined as the non collaboration of the psychiatrist in any activity leading to inhuman and degrading treatment or to the death penalty.

"It Had Only Been a Matter of Time Before I Had Relapsed Into Crime": Aspects of Care and Personal Recovery in Forensic Mental Health

INTRODUCTION

Forensic psychiatry has the dual task of focusing on the prevention of reoffending as well as maintaining psychiatric rehabilitation. No previous studies addressing the patients' own views on reducing their risk of serious reoffending were found.

AIM

This study describes forensic psychiatric inpatients' own views on what aspects of care and personal recovery are important in reducing their risk of serious reoffending.

METHODS

A structured qualitative approach was used. Data were collected from semistructured interviews and analyzed with a systematic qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The results highlight aspects of care and personal recovery. Four themes emerged: "time: opportunity for change," "trust: creating a context with meaningful relations," "hope: to reach a future goal," and "toolbox: tools needed for recovery."

DISCUSSION

The themes present with a continuum. At one end, there are patients who appreciated possibilities to participate actively in care and treatment. At the other end, patients felt they had no use for their care. Interestingly, although patients in our study were asked for their opinion on how they could reduce their dangerousness, all themes fit into established personal recovery processes found in general psychiatric populations. The theme "time: opportunity for change" seems to have an overarching importance.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

By understanding the specific content along these themes, relevant to the individual patient, carers may be able to better support their personal recovery journey. Because time spent as inpatients in forensic psychiatry is an overarching issue, carers need to be persistent over time.

Forensic psychiatry in Europe: The perspective of the Ghent Group

OBJECTIVE

The Ghent Group was established in 2004 as a forum for forensic psychiatrists from different countries in Europe in order to bridge the gaps in knowledge, experience, practice and care which exist between them due to their different legal traditions and constitutions in dealing with people having mental disorders who come into conflict with the law.

METHODS

The Ghent Group considers itself as a loosely organised think tank to which all interested and invited professionals can contribute without statutory restraints. Its aim is to facilitate communication with mentally disordered offenders appearing in court, to understand the procedures of our neighbouring countries and to find common ground between clinicians.

RESULTS

The major focus of the Ghent Group is on teaching and training both at a national level, where one can learn about the methods of training from each other, and at a European level. The group of trainees from different countries experiment in seminars in solving medico-legal cases considering European Human Rights issues and their respective national procedures and institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

This helps not only to understand the differences between the national medico-legal procedures but also to deepen the understanding of the principles and practice in one's own country.