Suppr超能文献

[法医精神病学家对后续预防性拘留法律的专家意见]

[Expert opinions of forensic psychiatrists regarding laws of subsequent preventive detention].

作者信息

Basdekis-Jozsa Raphaela, Briken Peer

机构信息

Institut für Sexualforschung und Forensische Psychiatrie des Universitätsklinikums Hamburg-Eppendorf.

出版信息

Psychiatr Prax. 2012 Aug;39(6):293-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1305079. Epub 2012 Aug 27.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

With regard to changes in the German law of preventive detention--a sentence handed down to offenders who committed a grave offence and are considered a danger to public safety, similar to the preventive detention law in New Zealand--an online survey amongst forensic psychiatrists has been conducted between July and October 2011. Questions have been raised regarding the necessity of preventive detention, subsequent preventive detention (the possibility of imposing "preventive detention" after sentencing, which was ruled a violation of the European Convention of Human Rights by the European Court of Human Rights), and the Therapy Placement Act from January 1st, 2011.

METHODS

Participants have been contacted via email and participation was anonymous. An online-platform has been established, and has been open for about four months.

RESULTS

Most participants have been familiar with either court reports regarding preventive detention or the content of the Therapy Placement Act. Less than one third had already answered issues considering this new law. All participants have considered preventive detention as necessary, but subsequent preventive detention as well as the Therapy Placement Act as not required.

CONCLUSIONS

The Therapy Placement Act was considered to be modified by involving an interdisciplinary advisory board. Terms of "psychiatric disorder" should be defined or replaced, and frequency of psychiatric assessment should be reduced.

摘要

目的

鉴于德国预防性拘留法的变化——对犯下严重罪行且被认为对公共安全构成威胁的罪犯判处的刑罚,类似于新西兰的预防性拘留法——2011年7月至10月间对法医精神病学家进行了一项在线调查。调查涉及预防性拘留的必要性、后续预防性拘留(判刑后施加“预防性拘留”的可能性,欧洲人权法院裁定这违反了《欧洲人权公约》)以及2011年1月1日起实施的《治疗安置法》。

方法

通过电子邮件联系参与者,参与是匿名的。建立了一个在线平台,开放了约四个月。

结果

大多数参与者熟悉关于预防性拘留的法庭报告或《治疗安置法》的内容。不到三分之一的人已经回答了与这项新法律相关的问题。所有参与者都认为预防性拘留是必要的,但后续预防性拘留以及《治疗安置法》则没有必要。

结论

《治疗安置法》被认为应通过设立一个跨学科咨询委员会进行修改。应界定或替换“精神疾病”的术语,并应减少精神病评估的频率。

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