The education and training of this individual is threefold. He or she is a medical doctor. He continues training as a psychiatrist. Thirdly, he trains to answer questions about psychiatric classifications as related to the law. The forensic psychiatrist determines whether someone is fit to stand trial or not.
The standards for proving legal insanity are more stringent than those required in a non-legal diagnosis. First the alleged offenders condition is taken into consideration. Next it must be proven that he was not capable of judging right from wrong when he committed the crime.
One example is the patient who is functional when medicated regularly. However, this patient, when the medication is working, will think he no longer needs medication. This is untrue. When he goes off the medication, at that time he is incapable of telling right from wrong.
The alleged has his sanity judged as legally sane or insane. The psychiatrist advises the judge as to how to rule after his evaluation. His opinion is based on the mental state of the accused at the time he committed the crime being adjudicated.
This will, in the majority and perhaps all of the cases, be a violent crime. It may range from sexual assault to first degree murder. This expert is protecting the rights of the accused. He is also protecting the public from having a dangerous predator loose on the street.
The schizophrenic wears a mantle of normalcy when he is under the proper medication. The caveat is that, when unsupervised, he is unlikely to continue taking the pills. Gradually, he will return to the dangerous predator he was before starting on the medication.
When called upon as an expert witness the psychiatrist testifies under oath. He will have interviewed the accused a sufficient number of hours to diagnose him. His opinion is presented without regard to what either attorney is attempting to prove. But, a defense attorney may consult him and call upon him to testify only when the diagnosis supports his opinion. The prosecuting attorney will also use an expert witness who supports his assumption of guilt.
The judge in the case receives a detailed report. He and the jury are the only individuals he is supposed to influence. The report will give an explanation of his findings. Although a judge has legal expertise, his qualifications do not include determining mental health status. He cannot evaluate a criminal as to competency.
The judge has guidelines as to the number of years in prison he can sentence a criminal offender to for a specific crime. The psychiatrist has mental health guidelines. His diagnosis of legal competency must comply with those.
There are very specific criterion to be met. At the time the crime was committed, the accused must have been unaware of what he was doing. Alternatively, he could not appreciate the wrongfulness of the crime because of a mental disease. If the psychiatrist or the judge do not make correct determinations, the public will be endangered. If sent to a mental institution instead of prison, it is possible he may hurt someone there.
The standards for proving legal insanity are more stringent than those required in a non-legal diagnosis. First the alleged offenders condition is taken into consideration. Next it must be proven that he was not capable of judging right from wrong when he committed the crime.
One example is the patient who is functional when medicated regularly. However, this patient, when the medication is working, will think he no longer needs medication. This is untrue. When he goes off the medication, at that time he is incapable of telling right from wrong.
The alleged has his sanity judged as legally sane or insane. The psychiatrist advises the judge as to how to rule after his evaluation. His opinion is based on the mental state of the accused at the time he committed the crime being adjudicated.
This will, in the majority and perhaps all of the cases, be a violent crime. It may range from sexual assault to first degree murder. This expert is protecting the rights of the accused. He is also protecting the public from having a dangerous predator loose on the street.
The schizophrenic wears a mantle of normalcy when he is under the proper medication. The caveat is that, when unsupervised, he is unlikely to continue taking the pills. Gradually, he will return to the dangerous predator he was before starting on the medication.
When called upon as an expert witness the psychiatrist testifies under oath. He will have interviewed the accused a sufficient number of hours to diagnose him. His opinion is presented without regard to what either attorney is attempting to prove. But, a defense attorney may consult him and call upon him to testify only when the diagnosis supports his opinion. The prosecuting attorney will also use an expert witness who supports his assumption of guilt.
The judge in the case receives a detailed report. He and the jury are the only individuals he is supposed to influence. The report will give an explanation of his findings. Although a judge has legal expertise, his qualifications do not include determining mental health status. He cannot evaluate a criminal as to competency.
The judge has guidelines as to the number of years in prison he can sentence a criminal offender to for a specific crime. The psychiatrist has mental health guidelines. His diagnosis of legal competency must comply with those.
There are very specific criterion to be met. At the time the crime was committed, the accused must have been unaware of what he was doing. Alternatively, he could not appreciate the wrongfulness of the crime because of a mental disease. If the psychiatrist or the judge do not make correct determinations, the public will be endangered. If sent to a mental institution instead of prison, it is possible he may hurt someone there.
About the Author:
If you are looking for information about forensic psychiatrist, pay a visit to our web pages online here today. Additional details are available at http://childadultforensics.com now.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire