A study led by Douglas Mossman, MD, director of the UC College of Laws Glenn M. Weaver
Institute of Law and Psychiatry and the forensic psychiatry fellowship at the UC College of Medicine demonstrated that a group of psychiatrists who evaluated mental competence from case files of 156 criminal defendants performed at a 29 of 30 level of accuracy. That is 96.7 percent accuracy as judged by analysis and peers..
The common television and movie induced misconception that psychiatrists are hired guns for opposing sides in the decision of mental competency has been disproved beyond hope of refute. The study is based on a latent class modeling. The research looked at the record of psychiatrists decisions about mental competence in 156 cases.
The crux of the matter is a judgment call. No definitive analytical test for mental competence exists. A decision of competence to stand trial is based on a single person's expert opinion that is based on that individuals experience and judgment. There is no analytical test for experience or judgment either.
This first of its kind study claims to uphold the decisions and veracity of psychiatric experts in court as well as the courts use of said experts.
http://www.uc.edu/news/NR.aspx?id=10796
Published 10/14/09.
Comments