Ethical and Professional Demands for Forensic Mental Health Professionals in the Post-Atkins Era

Brodsky, Stanley L.; Galloway, Virginia

doi:10.1207/s15327019eb1301_02

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those who work in Atkins ‐type cases have identified several potential limitations or unanswered questions about the validity of existing adaptive functioning measures for use in capital cases, including whether self‐report formats are appropriate, deciding who is an appropriate informant for providing information needed to score an adaptive functioning measure, and whether existing measures are appropriate for those with antisocial traits (e.g., Brodsky & Galloway, ; Denkowski & Denkowski, , ; Everington & Olley, ; Fabian, ; Greenspan & Switzky, ; Olley & Cox, ; Stevens & Price, ; Tasse, ; Widaman & Siperstein, ). Indeed, Widaman and Siperstein () have argued that the appropriate assessment of adaptive functioning is the issue that involves “the most debate in Atkins ‐type cases” (p. 8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Self‐Report Measures of Adaptive Functioning Appropriate for those High in Psychopathic Traits?

Young-Lundquist

Boccaccini

Simpler

2012

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is ongoing debate about the methods that evaluators should use to assess the adaptive functioning of an individual in an Atkins claim, including the appropriateness of using self-report measures and extent to which adaptive functioning measures are valid for persons with a history of violent offending. This study examined whether offenders' self-report adaptive functioning scores tended to decrease as their level of psychopathic traits increased. Eighty-five male felony probationers completed the self-report version of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System - II (ABAS-II: Harrison & Oakland, 2003), the Psychopathic Personality Inventory - Revised (PPI-R: Lilienfeld & Widows, 2005), and a brief intelligence screening measure. ABAS-II composite scores were negatively correlated with PPI-R Self-Centered Impulsivity and Coldheartedness scores, but positively correlated with Fearless Dominance scores. These relationships appeared to be due, in part, to over-reporting symptoms of impairment across measures, suggesting that scores on self-report adaptive functioning measures may be especially susceptible to feigning.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Self‐Report Measures of Adaptive Functioning Appropriate for those High in Psychopathic Traits?

Young-Lundquist

Boccaccini

Simpler

2012

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although diagnoses of mental retardation require consideration of both intellectual and adaptive functioning, many of the controversial evaluation issues in these cases surround the assessment of adaptive functioning. Indeed, questions about the definition and assessment of adaptive behavior in death penalty cases have been the focus of a series of recent appellate court decisions (Clemons v. Alabama, 2005;Ex parte Briseno, 2004;Pruitt v. Indiana, 2005) and scholarly publications (Brodsky & Galloway, 2003;Everington & Keyes, 1999;Fabian, 2006;Olley, 2006;Olvera, Dever, & Earnest, 2000;Stevens & Price, 2006). Defining adaptive functioning.…”

Section: What Methods Are Appropriate For Evaluating Adaptive Functiomentioning

confidence: 99%

Four practical and conceptual assessment issues that evaluators should address in capital case mental retardation evaluations.

Young¹,

Boccaccini²,

Conroy³

et al. 2007

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What unique assessment issues do evaluators face when conducting mental retardation evaluations in capital cases? This article describes 4 assessment issues and reports how 20 evaluators in 1 state have approached them: (a) What methods are appropriate for evaluating adaptive functioning in this context? (b) Should information about criminal behavior be used as evidence of adaptive functioning? (c) Should correctional officers serve as informants regarding adaptive behavior? and (d) How should the Flynn effect influence the interpretation of intelligence test scores? Implications for practice are that practitioners should expect to be asked about the relation between criminal behavior and adaptive functioning, must think carefully about the validity of tests of adaptive functioning for inmates, and must be knowledgeable about the current state of Flynn effect research.

show abstract

“…In cases in which the examinee has been incarcerated for a number of years, the examiner must perform a retrospective assessment of adaptive functioning. Concerns exist regarding the validity of retrospective assessments of adaptive behavior (Brodsky & Galloway, 2003).…”

Section: Retrospective Assessments Of Adaptive Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Atkins v. Virginia: Implications and Recommendations for Forensic Practice

Macvaugh¹,

Cummingham²

2009

The Journal of Psychiatry & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2002, the United States Supreme Court held in the landmark case of Atkins v. Virginia (2002) that the execution of individuals who have mental retardation is unconstitutional. Following the Atkins holding, courts in death penalty jurisdictions have relied heavily upon mental health professionals in making a determination of whether or not capital offenders have mental retardation. The determination of mental retardation in death penalty cases, however, presents complex challenges for both courts and mental health professionals. In addition, there is variability in how death penalty states define mental retardation and in the assessment methods used by mental health professionals to diagnose mental retardation in such cases. The purpose of this article is to (a) describe how statutes in death penalty jurisdictions have operationalized the various clinical definitions of mental retardation, (b) discuss issues confronting examiners in assessing and diagnosing mental retardation in Atkins cases, and (c) provide recommendations for forensic practice.

show abstract

Ethical and Professional Demands for Forensic Mental Health Professionals in the Post-Atkins Era

Cited by 10 publications

References 11 publications

Are Self‐Report Measures of Adaptive Functioning Appropriate for those High in Psychopathic Traits?

Are Self‐Report Measures of Adaptive Functioning Appropriate for those High in Psychopathic Traits?

Four practical and conceptual assessment issues that evaluators should address in capital case mental retardation evaluations.

Atkins v. Virginia: Implications and Recommendations for Forensic Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About