The discipline of clinical psychology is evolving. Clinical psychologists are
no longer limited to couches and working out of their own offices. They are now
being put in the stand in courtrooms all over the world. Not because they are on
trial themselves, however. Rather, they are there to share their expertise in
areas that involve an individual in legal matters. The field of forensic
psychology has grown in the 21st century because courtrooms recognize the value
of psychologists’ testimonies to help juries reach a clearer verdict. Not only
that, but psychologists can help identify competence to stand trial, perform
psychological autopsies and criminal profiling, and also aid in child custody
cases. Like all fields in psychology, forensics has many perspectives. This
walk-through of forensic psychology will discuss the history, methods, and
prospects for the future of this field. Perspectives and History There is not a
singular function that clinical psychologists perform in the legal system.
Rather, there are many different roles and areas that they can undertake. For
example, they can focus on law enforcement psychology, the psychology of
litigation, correctional psychology, and forensic psychology (Nietzel,
Bernstein, & Milich, 1998). However, the latter is our main focus. Forensic
psychology involves many different areas in which clinical psychologists can be
considered experts in: competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility,
psychological damages in civil trials, civil competencies, psychological
autopsies and criminal profiling, and child custody and parental fitness (Nietzel
et al., 1998). Methods of Intervention and Change The reason why criminal
competence is necessary to establish is because according to United States law,
the criminal must understand the nature and purpose of the proceedings. This is
required for several reasons. First, if the defendant is competent, the results
of the trial are more likely to be accurate. Second, it would be considered
immoral to sentence a convicted defendant of something that he or she doesn’t
understand. Lastly, the whole theory behind our judicial system relies on the
defendant being able to defend his or herself in court. If the defense believes
the defendant was not competent at the time of the unlawful act, the defense can
plead not guilty by reason of insanity. Then forensic psychologists can testify
whether or not they believe the defendant is insane or not. If the defendant is
found to be insane, then the judge sentences him or her to a mental institution
until the judge is convinced that the defendant is ready to be released. If the
defendant is not found to be insane, then the trial proceeds. Several rules have
been made in determining insanity, which have changed over the years to
accommodate changing standards. Such rules include the McNaughton, Durham, and
ALI rule (Nietzel et al.,1998).
Forensic psychologists also examine psychological damages in civil trials.
One of their duties is to decide whether these damages were due to the tort,
which is the wrongful act that causes harm to an individual. The psychologist
performs assessments similar to regular clinical assessments that include social
history, clinical interview, psychological testing, and available records. After
the assessment, the expert decides if the psychological damage was present
before the tort, or if it occurred due to the tort. Another duty of forensic
psychologists is to examine workers’ compensation cases. They must decide how
long the worker needs to recover from mental damages that their work-place may
have caused. Similar to the tort cases, the expert must discover whether the
injury was due to the place of employment or if it was already present (Nietzel
et al., 1998). Civil competencies deal with whether or not a person is able to
understand information that is used to make decisions and then act accordingly.
Examples include whether a person is capable of managing financial situations,
or if he or she is able to choose or refuse medical treatment. Scholars have
agreed that four abilities are necessary to make decisions competently:
understanding information pertaining to the decision to be made, applying that
information with concern to the consequences of the decision, thinking
rationally to evaluate strategies, and the communication of the decision. It is
up to the clinical psychologist to determine if the person is making a rational
decision by means of clinical evaluation, and then relaying this information to
the proper person or agency (Nietzel et al., 1998). Psychological autopsies and
criminal profiling deal with understanding a person’s state of mind before a
crime is committed and to predict behavior, respectively. Psychological
autopsies were first used in the 1950’s when the county coroner’s office needed
to know if the cause of certain deaths was suicide, murder, or an accident. This
type of question is most likely raised by insurance companies when claims are
made. Clinicians use life records of the person, and also interviews with
friends and family in making their decisions. It in uncertain how accurate these
psychological autopsies actually are, because the true state of mind that the
person was in will never be known for sure. Judges are not certain how valid
these autopsies are, and are reluctant to use them in criminal cases. Ultimately
it is up to the jury to decide (Nietzel et al., 1998). Criminal profiling is
used to generate suspects in crimes. Crace (1995) describes it as “the science
of making logical deductions about possible suspects for any given crime based
on shared patterns of behavior of those who commit certain crimes.” From this
information, clinicians can make predictions as to who the criminal is. Criminal
profiling has been used since the 1970’s and is now used by the FBI and the
National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime. Clinicians interview
criminals to see how they committed the crimes, and they look at common
personality traits that distinguish them from the general population.