The 4 Ds of Forensic Mental Health Assessments of Personal Injury

The field of psychiatric/psychological injury and law concerns tort and other legal claims for injuries sustained in events at issue, such as in motor vehicle accidents (MVAs), worker compensation, or the veteran affairs (VA). The 4 Ds refer to the requirement that legal action in these types of cases can proceed when there is a duty, the duty has been discharged with dereliction, the resultant act has caused directly tortious harm, and damages are applicable. In contrast, the related 4 Cs refer to the conditions of effective forensic testimony. The principles of forensic mental health assessment (FMHA; Heilbrun et al., 2009) underscore the scientific requirements in forensic assessments, as do the American Psychological Association’s (APA, 2013) forensic specialty guidelines. For example, Brodsky’s maxims for effective work in court (Brodsky & Gutheil, 2016) cover a broad spectrum of ethical and practice guidelines for the profession. Similarly, Young (2016 a, b, c) has specified the parameters of admissible evidence in court, functioning ethically for the court, and the need to be comprehensive, scientifically informed, and impartial in forensic mental health assessments. All these sources lead to an integrated set of the principles for effective and ethical practice in the forensic arena of mental health work, referred here as the 4 Ds for the field of psychiatric/psychological injury and law. These revised 4 D principles involve Dignity, Distance, Data, and Determinations.     

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.     

Mental health policy in the liberal state: the example of the United States

Mental health policy arises out of the interaction of many different variables. These include (but are not limited to) the composition of the population of persons with severe mental illnesses; the means of dealing with disease and dependency; concepts of the etiology and nature of mental disorders; the organization and ideology of psychiatry; funding mechanisms; and existing popular, political, cultural, and professional values. But an often neglected but crucial factor in shaping policy is the very structure of the American political system, which played a crucial role in shaping mental health policy. Rather than emphasizing the neo-liberal theory and its accompanying hostility toward "unsuccessful" people and disdain of welfare, this article suggests that an understanding of mental health policy in the latter half of the twentieth century is better served by an examination of what actually happened. Theory, however attractive, rarely can encompass the messy data of reality.     

When you reach a fork in the road, take it: science and product development as linked paths

There is a simple underlying message in this discussion, which has three parts. First, science has the capacity to generate new knowledge and harness that knowledge in the cause of developing products and technology that can reduce disease burdens among developing nation populations. Second, intellectual property is a tool to use in order to insure that new knowledge is not expropriated and exploited in a manner that threatens the ability to provide products and technology to poor people at an affordable price. Third, and finally, academic scientists need to understand that they can stride both pathways of the R&D road, remaining involved in generating basic knowledge while participating in the application of that knowledge towards product development and, through the use of best practice IP management, making it available in resource-poor environments. In order for this to happen, academia needs to maintain bridges to the private sector, while assiduously avoiding financial conflicts of interest, a topic not discussed in this paper. Academic scientists, whether already established or still completing their education, need access to training modules that allows them to define the challenges of the high disease burdens in the third world in human, and not just in consumption or dollar, terms. They also need education regarding the problems they work on, in order to engage them in the technology transfer from academia to the private sector; promote collaboration with scientists in the developing world; provide them with enough insights into the process and how it operates so that they know about the terms of any agreements with the private sector that would prevent poor people from accessing the ultimate product; and finally "reward" them in the academic system by advancement based on applied and field-based international translational and operational applied research. If these education programs develop and expand to increasing numbers of people in the research sector of academia, the number of people taking both paths described here will substantially increase. With that, the amount of research relevant to improving the health status--and indirectly, development--of developing countries will have been substantially increased.     

Distribution of Chemical Phenotypes (Chemotypes) in European Agricultural Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Cultivars

In Europe, more than 50 approved cultivars of fiber hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) are in agricultural production. Their content of psychoactive tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is legally restricted to <0.2% (%w/w in the dry, mature inflorescences). Cannabis strains with much higher THC contents are also grown, illegally or under license for drug production. Differentiation between these two groups relies on biochemical quantification of cannabinoid contents in mature floral material. For nonflowering material or tissue devoid of cannabinoids, the genetic prediction of the chemical phenotype (chemotype) provides a suitable method of distinction. Three discrete chemotypes, depending on the ratio of THC and the noneuphoric cannabidiol (CBD), can be distinguished: a “THC-predominant” type, a “CBD-predominant” type, and an intermediate chemotype. We present a systematic genetic prediction of chemotypes of 62 agricultural hemp cultivars grown in Europe. The survey reveals the presence of up to 35% B_T allele-carrying individuals (representing either a THC-predominant or an intermediate chemotype) in some cultivars—which is unexpected considering the legal THC limit of 0.2% THC. The fact that 100% of the seized drug-type seeds in this study revealed at least one B_T allele, reflects that plant breeding efforts have resulted in a fixation of the B_T allele in recreational Cannabis. To guarantee a sincere forensic application based on a genetic chemotype prediction, we recommend not to classify material of unknown origin if the samples size is below nine genetically independent individuals.     

Same menu,seperate tables: The institutionalist turn in political science and the study of European integration

Abstract Recent research on European integration has largely profited from the institutionalist turn in political science. Theoretical progress has, however, been hampered by the diverse understandings of this new research tradition. This paper tries to tackle the conceptual diversity in a positive way. We first analyze the neo–institutionalist turn in political science and European studies and then move on to a detailed analysis and comparison of the three competing approaches — sociological, historical, and rational choice institutionalism. Next, we will show that the main differences are as much epistemological as theoretical. A convergence towards a unifying institutionalist approach can thus only be possible if some sort of a methodological convergence takes place. We sketch how a synthesis between the competing schools might appear.