A Confusion of Tongues: Competence, Insanity, Psychiatry, and the Law

Gutheil, Thomas G.

doi:10.1176/ps.50.6.767

Cited by 12 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Forensic examiners must obtain information regarding a defendant's mental status and functional capacities during an alleged offense and analyze relevant data according to a jurisdictional legal standard (Gutheil, 2002;Packer, 2009;Rogers & Shuman, 2000). The challenge lies in ascertaining the internal workings and mental state of the defendant several weeks, months, or sometimes years later (Melton et al, 2007;Packer, 2009) and under circumstances far removed from the alleged offense (Gutheil, 1999(Gutheil, , 2002.…”

Section: Abstract Forensic Evaluation Mental State At the Time Of Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Time and Treatment on Recall of Mental State at the Time of Offense: Incompetent Defendants and Evaluation of Insanity

Haun

Gallagher

Milz

2010

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of insanity is an inherently difficult task due to its retrospective nature and reliance on a defendant's recall of events. Eliciting a defendant's version of events early in the criminal justice process is advisable to guard against inaccurate or incomplete recall due to normal forgetting and changes in circumstance and mental status. However, depending on the jurisdiction of examination, postponing this inquiry may be necessary to protect a defendant's right against self-incrimination. Such circumstances often occur in the context of simultaneous court-ordered evaluations of competency to stand trial and insanity. A case example illustrates the influence of time and psychiatric treatment on a defendant's recollection of an alleged offense and provides a framework for discussion of the importance of protecting the rights of indigent defendants, even if potentially critical information is lost as a result.

show abstract

Section: Abstract Forensic Evaluation Mental State At the Time Of Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Time and Treatment on Recall of Mental State at the Time of Offense: Incompetent Defendants and Evaluation of Insanity

Haun

Gallagher

Milz

2010

Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contributions to the CST Assessment Process Gutheil (1999) has argued that psychiatrists and the public share a confused sense of forensic terms including competence and insanity and has written a basic review of the constructs underlying each. That article is appropriate for someone wishing to gain an overview of the areas.…”

Section: Recent Psychological and Psychiatricmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitness/Competency to Stand Trial: A Conceptual Overview, Review of Existing Instruments, and Cross-Validation of the Nussbaum Fitness Questionnaire

Nussbaum¹,

Hancock²,

Turner³

et al. 2007

Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competency to Stand Trial or Fitness to Stand Trial (FST) is the most frequent referral issue facing forensic mental health professionals (FMHPs) and consumes considerable scarce resources in the process. This article summarizes minimalist and expanded legal approaches to FST and briefly describes three instruments developed by FMHPs to structure FST assessments. We then present evidence supporting the validity of the Nussbaum Fitness Questionnaire for efficiently screening individuals for fitness and blatant or subtle malingering. The paper ends with a number of suggestions to optimize use of these instruments within the current set of forensic mental health practices. Specifically, it is suggested that use of the screening instrument could reliably eliminate up to 70% of current referrals for complete assessments while the more in-depth semistructured interviews be utilized to confirm unfitness, especially when the mental health professional has more than trivial doubt regarding an individual's FST. [Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention 8:43-72 (2008)]

show abstract