Psychological Injury and Law: Special Issue Epilogue

To conclude the special series in the issue, which marks the end of the first volume of the journal, Psychological Injury and Law, the epilogue highlights its major goals and contributions. The special issue takes the field in more diverse directions. It demonstrates the multiple research and practice foci that are emerging in the field and its interdisciplinarity, from the law and forensics to practice and treatment. The field needs to view the person in context and not from one side or the other of the adversarial divide.     

Evaluating the Effects of Repeated Psychological Injury: an Introduction to the Special Issue

Psychological Injury and Law -     

Psychological Injury and Law: An Integrative Model

This article briefly reviews the literature on three areas of psychological injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, and traumatic brain injury, preparatory to presentation of an integrated biopsychosocial and forensic model of multifactorial causality. The model is the first in the field to (a) cover in one model the three types of psychological injury, (b) while including a full range of causality factors relevant to forensic psychology (such as pre-event, event-, post-event, and unrelated factors), and (c) while addressing the relevance of biopsychological and stress as a cohering factors in all conditions. (d) The model emphasizes the importance of individual differences, for example, in causality of symptom presentation. (e) The model acknowledges that in individual evaluations, psychologists need to consider threats to validity, response biases, and possible malingering, and verify whether pre-event factors fully explain post-event presentation.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Defining a Field

This article elaborates definitional and conceptual issues relevant to the field of psychological injury and law. It reviews the literature in the major areas that mark the field—law, forensic psychology, disability, and assessment/malingering. To meet admissibility requirements of testimony in court, psychologists and other mental health professionals need to maintain a comprehensive, impartial, and scientifically informed approach to assessments based on a state-of-the-art knowledge, such as made available in this journal.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Editorial on Practice Criteria

The area of psychological injury and law is one that is interdisciplinary, requiring knowledge in multiple areas. Psychologists should acquire the necessary background knowledge before working in it. At the same time, many clinicians encounter these types of cases. Credentialing bodies in states and provinces should consider establishing criteria for working in the area of psychological injury and law. Working groups in each jurisdiction can be established to help create these criteria. The journal Psychological Injury and Law (PIL) and its parent society, the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law (ASAPIL), can actively help the field of practicing psychology meet the objectives of this proposal.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Editorial on the Young and the Tested

In this editorial about our dynamic new journal and association, I describe how young professionals and students in both the mental health field and the legal profession can play a role in the association and how they can benefit from it and the journal. The association and journal are meant to serve the education and career aspirations of young people and, at the same time, we look forward to their contributions.     

Psychological Injury and Law: A Biopsychosocial and Forensic Perspective

The articles in the present special issue on the area of psychological injury and law broaden understanding of the area by considering topics outside the range of the seven major areas that mark the field. In the articles in this special issue, common themes include: (a) having comprehensive, recent literature reviews, (b) presentation of models related to psychological injury and law in which existing models are integrated, (c) integration of biopsychological and forensic perspectives, and (d) consideration of development or change processes, and examination of causality. (e) All the articles discuss possible improvements to the DSM-IV; for example, there should be a separate, sixth axis pertaining to causality.     

Disentangling the Disability Quagmire in Psychological Injury and Law

This paper aims to critically analyze the evolution of six models of conceptualization, determination, and prediction of occupational disability relevant in the medico-legal context of psychological injury. The six models are the (a) biomedical, (b) forensic, (c) psychosocial, (d) ecological, (e) economic, and (f) biopsychosocial. We will discuss the key commonalities and differences among the models, including disciplinary tradition, research paradigm, recognition of person–environment interaction, key tenets, and implications for practice and research in psychological injury. The paper will highlight and discuss psychosocial issues, often underemphasized in forensic psychological practice, including: (a) balanced assessment of primary, secondary, and tertiary gains and losses, (b) self-perception, (c) disability identity, (d) beliefs and expectations, (e) coping, (f) adaptation and positive growth, (g) social stigma and social reactions to disability, including disability harassment, and (h) recognition of system-based environmental influences and demands. We will provide a special focus on the current state of the science and practice of prediction of disability, of particular interest to researchers and clinicians involved in clinical and occupational prognostication in psychological injuries. Finally, we will draw conclusions and recommendations for future research and best practices in the psychological injury area using a cross-diagnostic, dynamic, functionally based, and integrated biopsychosocial and forensic model of disability.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Journal Policy on Ongoing Debates

This journal, Psychological Injury and Law, has made it a policy to publish articles that are part of ongoing debates. They might not be subject to the standard review process and are published from the perspective that the reader should decide on the merits of the science and arguments presented and that rebuttals, as well, should be allowed in order to make the best scientific case possible. In response to queries, the journal editor describes in depth the review process undertaken for Butcher et al. (Psychological Injury and Law 1(3):191–209, 2008). The journal editor indicated to the reviewers of Butcher et al. (Psychological Injury and Law 1(3):191–209, 2008), that “we let opinions stand even if we do not agree with them, checking uniquely the methodology, data, and science underlying the opinion, and let the scholar writing the rebuttal deal with any differences of opinion, also by addressing methodology, data, and science.” Ben Porath et al. (Psychological Injury and Law 2(2), 2009) have written a rebuttal of Butcher et al., equally reviewed from this perspective.     

Psychology,Law, and the Workplace: An Overview and Introduction to the Special Issue

Law and Human Behavior -     

Introduction to the Special Issue on Children,Families, and the Law

Law and Human Behavior -     

Psychological Injury and Law: Editorial Introducing a Journal and an Association

In this inaugural editorial to the journal, I describe briefly the topic of psychological injury and law and the association set up to house this the new journal on the topic. I present the journal’s aims and scope and invite members of the relevant professional communities to participate in our work and publications.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Editorial on What Mental Health Clinicians/Practitioners Need to Know

Mental health clinicians and practitioners often deal with cases of psychological injury (e.g., PTSD, pain, TBI), but frequently remain unprepared for the intricacies of providing adequate quality of service and of potential legal challenges of such cases. The editorial lists the areas in which specified knowledge is needed in working with cases of psychological injury and the dangers of being unprepared for court. At the same time, the list constitutes guides to central topics of the journal, Psychological Injury and Law, and its parent organization, the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law (ASAPIL). Professionals in mental health should be aware of the risks inherent in working in the field, as well as remedies, such as this journal.     

Psychological Injury and Law: Editorial on Truth and Consequences, Psychologists and Attorneys

Psychology and law are established but evolving professions that need to communicate better with each other. In the interface of psychology and law in civil proceedings, such as in cases of psychological injury in tort, psychology can help in arriving at just and fair legal decisions that are appropriate in context. Professionals in the legal and mental health communities will find that the combination of the journal, Psychological Injury and Law, and its housing association, ASAPIL, function as a bridge between the two communities.