Griffith Ezra E H
Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, 300 George Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2008;36(2):201-5.
Twenty-five years ago, a major article by Professor Alan Stone on ethics in forensic psychiatry was published. It caused reverberations on a national scale. After the seismic shocks that he had provoked settled down, several thoughtful forensic psychiatrists set out to take serious stock of his critique and to articulate ways in which corrective actions could be taken. Indeed, slightly more than a decade later, I critiqued Stone's ideas in my Presidential Address to the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. It is a unique privilege now to evaluate what Stone currently says about ethics in forensic psychiatry. While his present positions are slightly different from his arguments of 25 years ago, Stone still holds dearly to his ivory tower, which remains almost impermeable to the voices of those working in the trenches.
25年前,艾伦·斯通教授发表了一篇关于法医精神病学伦理学的重要文章。它在全国范围内引起了反响。在他引发的震动平息之后,几位深思熟虑的法医精神病学家开始认真审视他的批评,并阐明可以采取纠正行动的方式。事实上,略多于十年后,我在向美国精神病学与法律学会年会发表的主席演讲中批评了斯通的观点。现在,能够评估斯通目前对法医精神病学伦理学的看法是一种独特的荣幸。虽然他目前的立场与25年前的观点略有不同,但斯通仍然紧紧坚守他的象牙塔,而这座象牙塔几乎不为身处实际工作一线的人的声音所渗透。