The detection of malingered mental illness

Abstract

Clinical approaches to the detection of malingering are examined from the perspectives of both the general practitioner and forensic examiner. Specific strategies for identifving malingering patients is presented with particular attention to psychoses and post-traumatic stress disorders.

Hospitalization of criminal defendants for evaluation of competence to stand trial or for restoration of competence: clinical and legal issues

“…In the case of competence evaluations, Miller and Germain (1989) pointed out that, in addition to the legal knowledge and experience required to evaluate criminal defendants (as mentioned by four forensic program directors in their responses to the survey), evaluators need to be familiar with diagnostic categories that are uncommon in general clinical practice, but overrepresented in forensic populations, such as primary personality disorders, dissociative disorders (especially in male patients), and malingering. Resnick (1984) pointed out, however, that inpatient evaluations may actually teach defendants how to malinger better. Several scholars have challenged that rationale.…”

Neuropsychological evaluation in the assessment of personal injury

“…This is not, however, the only kind of distortion that may be encountered in forensic practice. Resnick (1984), for example, distinguishes pure malingering (the feigning of disease or disability when it does not exist at all) from partial malingering (conscious exaggeration of symptoms actually present), and adds the category of false imputation (the ascribing of actual symptoms to a cause consciously recognized as having no relationship to them). This last category is panicularly relevant to personal injury claims and highlights and absolute need to evaluate the possibility of any conditions or events predating, coexisting with, or occuring subsequent to the claimed precipitating event.…”

The assessment of competency for execution: An overview

“…Even a minimally adequate assessment under such circumstances should include more than one contact with the individual being evaluated (Zskin, 1981). In addition, a great deal of historical and descriptive information should be obtained from third parties (see, e.g., Melton, Petrila, Poythress, & Slobogin, in press) and particular procedures employed to assess the possibility of exaggeration or minimization of psychopathology (Resnick, 1984;Rogers, 1984, Ziskin, 1981. The circumstances of the evaluation, including the physical environment and the people present, are an additional consideration.…”