Bycroft Debra, Dear Greg E, Drake Deirdre
Psychology and Criminology, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Jan 30;26(3):355-374. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1506713. eCollection 2019.
Psychological reports for use in court must be relevant to the legal issues in dispute, meet professional standards, and reflect evidence-based practice. Using the Delphi method, a high degree of consensus was found among Australian experts in the methodology and knowledge required for conducting forensic mental health assessment (FMHAs) and the content needed in pre-sentence reports. Consensus was absent in two areas, if a pre-sentence report should always include a risk-assessment; and the need for a model to guide the FMHA. Without a model it is difficult for practitioners to justify their decision-making process, and judicial officers have no mechanism to determine if the work provided to the court is of an acceptable standard. Future research should focus on developing a model for presentence reports that includes a decision-making process and minimum standards. Researchers also need to determine judicial officers' views on the helpfulness of presentence reports.
用于法庭的心理报告必须与争议中的法律问题相关,符合专业标准,并反映循证实践。通过德尔菲法,澳大利亚法医精神健康评估(FMHA)的方法和知识以及量刑前报告所需内容方面的专家们达成了高度共识。在两个领域未达成共识:量刑前报告是否应始终包括风险评估;以及是否需要一个模型来指导FMHA。没有模型,从业者很难证明其决策过程的合理性,司法官员也没有机制来确定提交给法庭的工作是否达到可接受的标准。未来的研究应侧重于开发一个量刑前报告模型,该模型应包括决策过程和最低标准。研究人员还需要确定司法官员对量刑前报告有用性的看法。