Suppr超能文献

裁决能力。

Adjudicative competence.

作者信息

Dawes Sharron E, Palmer Barton W, Jeste Dilip V

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, USA.

出版信息

Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2008 Sep;21(5):490-4. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e328308b2ee.

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although the basic standards of adjudicative competence were specified by the US Supreme Court in 1960, there remain a number of complex conceptual and practical issues in interpreting and applying these standards. In this report we provide a brief overview regarding the general concept of adjudicative competence and its assessment, as well as some highlights of recent empirical studies on this topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most adjudicative competence assessments are conducted by psychiatrists or psychologists. There are no universal certification requirements, but some states are moving toward required certification of forensic expertise for those conducting such assessments. Current data indicate inconsistencies in application of the existing standards even among forensic experts, but the recent publication of consensus guidelines may foster improvements in this arena. There are also ongoing efforts to develop and validate structured instruments to aid competency evaluations. Telemedicine-based competency interviews may facilitate evaluation by those with specific expertise for assessment of complex cases. There is also interest in empirical development of educational methods to enhance adjudicative competence.

SUMMARY

Adjudicative competence may be difficult to measure accurately, but the assessments and tools available are advancing. More research is needed on methods of enhancing decisional capacity among those with impaired competence.

摘要

综述目的

尽管美国最高法院于1960年规定了审判能力的基本标准,但在解释和应用这些标准方面仍存在一些复杂的概念和实际问题。在本报告中,我们简要概述了审判能力的一般概念及其评估,以及近期关于该主题的实证研究要点。

最新发现

大多数审判能力评估由精神科医生或心理学家进行。目前没有通用的认证要求,但一些州正朝着要求对进行此类评估的人员进行法医专业认证的方向发展。当前数据表明,即使在法医专家中,现有标准的应用也存在不一致的情况,但最近发布的共识指南可能会促进这一领域的改进。目前也在不断努力开发和验证结构化工具以辅助能力评估。基于远程医疗的能力访谈可能会方便具有特定专业知识的人员对复杂案件进行评估。人们还对通过实证开发教育方法以提高审判能力感兴趣。

总结

审判能力可能难以准确衡量,但现有的评估和工具正在不断进步。对于提高能力受损者的决策能力的方法,还需要进行更多研究。

相似文献

1
Adjudicative competence.裁决能力。
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2008 Sep;21(5):490-4. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e328308b2ee.
9
Reliability of clinical judgment of patients' competency to give informed consent: a case vignette study.
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2000 Apr;54(2):245-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2000.00665.x.
10
Ethics and professional medical opinion and Guardianship and Administration legislation.
Intern Med J. 2006 Aug;36(8):540-1. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2006.01111.x.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验