Department of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 26;13(4):e0194332. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194332. eCollection 2018.
The ability of an individual to participate in courtroom proceedings is assessed by clinicians using legal 'fitness to plead' criteria. Findings of 'unfitness' are so rare that there is considerable professional unease concerning the utility of the current subjective assessment process. As a result, mentally disordered defendants may be subjected unfairly to criminal trials. The Law Commission in England and Wales has proposed legal reform, as well as the utilisation of a defined psychiatric instrument to assist in fitness to plead assessments. Similar legal reforms are occurring in other jurisdictions. Our objective was to produce and validate a standardised assessment instrument of fitness to plead employing a filmed vignette of criminal proceedings. The instrument was developed in consultation with legal and clinical professionals, and was refined using standard item reduction methods in two initial rounds of testing (n = 212). The factorial structure, test-retest reliability and convergent validity of the resultant instrument were assessed in a further round (n = 160). As a result of this iterative process a 25-item scale was produced, with an underlying two-factor structure representing the foundational and decision-making abilities underpinning fitness to plead. The sub-scales demonstrate good internal consistency (factor 1: 0·76; factor 2: 0·65) and test-retest stability (0·7) as well as excellent convergent validity with scores of intelligence, executive function and mentalising abilities (p≤0·01 in all domains). Overall the standardised Fitness to Plead Assessment instrument has good psychometric properties. It has the potential to ensure that the significant numbers of mentally ill and cognitively impaired individuals who face trial are objectively assessed, and the courtroom process critically informed.
个体参与法庭诉讼程序的能力由临床医生使用法律上的“适合答辩”标准进行评估。“不适合”的发现非常罕见,因此当前主观评估过程的实用性存在相当大的专业不安。结果,精神障碍被告可能不公平地受到刑事审判。英格兰和威尔士的法律委员会提出了法律改革,以及利用定义明确的精神科仪器来协助答辩能力评估。其他司法管辖区也在发生类似的法律改革。我们的目标是制作并验证一种使用刑事诉讼电影片段的标准化答辩能力评估工具。该工具是在与法律和临床专业人员协商后开发的,并在两轮初始测试(n=212)中使用标准项目减少方法进行了改进。在进一步一轮测试(n=160)中评估了该工具的因子结构、重测信度和收敛效度。通过这个迭代过程,产生了一个 25 项的量表,具有潜在的两个因素结构,代表了答辩能力的基础和决策能力。子量表表现出良好的内部一致性(因子 1:0.76;因子 2:0.65)和重测信度(0.7),以及与智力、执行功能和心理化能力的得分的极好收敛效度(所有领域均为 p≤0.01)。总的来说,标准化答辩能力评估工具具有良好的心理计量学特性。它有可能确保面对审判的大量精神病和认知障碍个体得到客观评估,并批判性地告知法庭程序。