Lay and Professional Perceptions of Dangerousness and Other Forensic Issues 30 Canadian Journal of Criminology 1988

About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

30 Canadian J. Criminology 215 (1988)
Lay and Professional Perceptions of Dangerousness and Other Forensic Issues

handle is hein.journals/cjccj30 and id is 231 raw text is: Lay and Professional Perceptions
of Dangerousness and Other
Forensic Issues'
MARGARET WINDSOR JACKSON
SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY
SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
11 a W montr6 des bandes viddo d'entretiens psychiatriques rdels intervenus
avec des accuses A des groupes de profanes, de psychiatres, de travailleurs
sociaux, d'infirmi~res psychiatriques et d'avocats et il leur a W demand6 de
se prononcer sur la dangerosit6, la maladie mentale, l'aptitude A 8tre trait6 et
la responsabilit6 criminelle. I1 leur a &6, en outre, demand6 d'indiquer dans
quelle mesure ils avaient confiance dans leurs decisions. Les rtsultats ont
montr6 des rtponses semblables dans le cas de tous les groupes et quant
toutes les decisions, sauf l'aptitude A etre trait6, alors que les decisions 6taient
un peu plus diffuses; cependant, le degr6 de confiance 6tait le plus 6lev6 en
majeure partie chez les psychiatres et les avocats, ce qui fait croire qu'ils
6taient plus strs d'eux dans leurs dtcisions. L'intrt de ces donndes du point
de vue judiciaire est manifeste: plus le ttmoin est str de lui, plus son ttmoignage
est credible. Finalement, les constatations (qui cadrent avec celles d'une 6tude
prtctdente men6e par l'auteur A partir de rtsumts de cas) met en doute le
statut d'expert-ttmoin des cliniciens. Si d'autres peuvent en arriver A des
dtcisions semblables, oi reside la contribution particuli~re du clinicien?
Groups of laypeople, psychiatrists, forensic social workers, forensic psychiat-
ric nurses, and lawyers viewed videotapes of actual psychiatric interviews of
accused individuals and were asked to make decisions of dangerousness, men-
tal illness, treatability, and criminal responsibility. They were additionally
asked to indicate the degree of confidence they felt in these decisions. Patterns
of decision outcomes indicated similar responses for all groups for all deci-
sions, except treatability, which was somewhat more scattered; however, con-
fidence levels were highest for psychiatrists and lawyers for the most part,
suggesting they were comfortable making these decisions. The relevance to
the courtroom is obvious; the more confident the witness, the more credi-
bility his/her testimony. Finally, the findings (consistent with those of an
earlier study by the author which used case summaries) questions the expert
witness status of clinicians. If others can reach similar decision outcomes,
wherein lies the unique clinical contribution?
Introduction
Traditionally questions arising with reference to the mental states
of an accused have related to triability and responsibility. With the rela-