Litigious paranoids and the legal system: the role of the forensic psychiatrist

Forensic psychiatrists should be aware of the many ways that paranoid individuals may present within the legal system. Litigious paranoids often utilize the legal system as a vehicle to act out their fantasies and delusional preoccupations. Imaginary grievances, accusations based on delusional ideation, and irrational vindictiveness toward imagined persecutors may find full expression in any number of legal contexts. They can defeat the rational and legitimate objectives of the legal system, enmesh innocent and unsuspecting victims in nightmarish legal entanglements, and subvert the process of justice. The forensic psychiatrist can assist the court by alerting it to the presence of paranoid illness in parties or witnesses and by clarifying what the effects of such psychopathology are and what the most favorable response should be. Three legal contexts wherein paranoid individuals may present within the legal system are discussed: the "hypercompetent" defendant, the paranoid party in a divorce proceeding, and the paranoid complaining witness. Case illustrations are presented for each legal context. Two issues are discussed: the dividing line between paranoid ideation (and its impact on the legal process) and so-called "normal" thinking (and its objective to use the legal process to obtain certain ends); and the degree to which psychiatric opinions in this area should influence the way an individual's case is handled by the legal system. The author concludes that, despite the costs involved, it is preferable that even paranoids have their "day in court."     

The role of the psychiatrist in evaluating a prison mental health system in litigation

Federal courts during the past 14 years have recognized that many prisons in the United States have provided constitutionally inadequate medical and psychiatric services. Our recent national survey indicates that at least 20 states have had at least one part of their correctional system included in a certified class action suit that alleged insufficient mental health services for inmates. This article reviews the role of the expert psychiatric witness during the phases of litigation that involve proposed remedial plans and compliance in implementing remedial plans. Available epidemiologic data about psychiatric disorders among prison inmates, standards for correctional mental health care, and various mental health system models are briefly reviewed. A comprehensive approach to evaluating proposed remedial plans and assessing issues of compliance with accepted plans is described. Special attention is directed toward psychiatric issues unique to a correctional system.     

The role of the defense psychiatrist in workmen's compensation cases

Tomorrow's psychiatrist should be more cognizant, competent, and comfortable in forensic science matters. Psychiatric cases are increasingly the subjects of litigation, but justice in the court depends on able advocacy by all parties. Advocacy for patient-plaintiffs is more similar to customary clinical roles than is advocacy for defendant insurance companies, which nevertheless are as needful of competent psychiatric experts as patient-plaintiffs if justice is to be done. Ironically, defense psychiatrist can do much to help patient-plaintiffs if they understand their roles correctly. Since legal systems are designed to produce justice, not therapy, the forensic competence of future psychiatrists will help to make litigation more therapeutic and just for patients. This paper describes the peculiarities of psychiatric work in litigated workmen's compensation cases, focusing on the role of the defense psychiatrist. We will highlight the constructive and therapeutically gratifying potentials of this work. Greater familiarity with the process will help to enlist the interest and participation of psychiatrist in workmen's compensation cases for the ultimate benefit of the patients and improvement of the legal system.     

The forensic psychiatrist of the future

The rate of change in scientific knowledge and the growing psychiatric sophistication of attorneys and courts have made it increasingly difficult for forensic psychiatrists to retain proficiency in the full spectrum of potential professional activities. As the consumers of forensic services become more sophisticated, forensic psychiatrists have an increasing need to become scientifically informed and a decreasing need to become legally informed. Traditional training in forensic psychiatry, which emphasizes clinical, legal, and institutional knowledge and experience, gives short shift to behavioral science and other technical knowledge that can enhance the validity of forensic assessments and their value to the legal system and society. Forensic psychiatrists can best respond to these changes and maximize the value of their assessments by narrowing their focus to some subset of the four branches of the discipline: criminal behavior, mental disability, forensic child psychiatry, and legal aspects of psychiatric practice. Maximal proficiency in each of these four branches requires a greater depth of knowledge and experience than was once sufficient among those who practiced in all four areas. Fellowship training programs and professional organizations should lead forensic psychiatry into the twenty-first century by organizing their efforts along these four parallel tracks.     

证明过程的成本分析——以当事人主义刑事审判模式为对象

刑事审判证明过程分为证据采集、证据审查和证据认定三个阶段。证据采集是发现事实,产生生产成本;证据审查是沟通事实,产生交易成本;证据认定是确认事实,产生行为成本。证据制度的目标是准确、公正和效率,路径是实现成本平衡且最小化。相对于职权主义,当事人主义刑事审判模式证明程序具有成本优势。