Suppr超能文献

澳大利亚法庭对青少年量刑的心理报告。

Psychological reports for sentencing juveniles in Australian courts.

作者信息

Bycroft Debra, Dear Greg E, Drake Deirdre

机构信息

Psychology and Criminology, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Australia.

出版信息

Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Jan 30;26(3):355-374. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1506713. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

相似文献

1
Psychological reports for sentencing juveniles in Australian courts.澳大利亚法庭对青少年量刑的心理报告。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Jan 30;26(3):355-374. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1506713. eCollection 2019.
2
A decision-making model for pre-sentence evaluations for juveniles.一种针对青少年判决前评估的决策模型。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2020 May 5;28(1):1-26. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1751332. eCollection 2021.
3
Judicial sentencing considerations in cases of violent offenders versus sexual offenders.暴力罪犯与性犯罪者案件中的司法量刑考量。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2018 Jun 20;25(5):653-674. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1473175. eCollection 2018.
4
Psychological expert witness testimony and judicial decision making trends.心理学专家证人证言与司法决策趋势。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2015 Sep-Dec;42-43:149-53. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.08.020. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
7
Diversion evaluations: a specialized forensic examination.转移评估:一项专门的法医检查。
Behav Sci Law. 2017 Sep;35(5-6):418-430. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2309. Epub 2017 Oct 19.
8
[Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].[德国药品效益评估的程序和方法]
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008 Dec;133 Suppl 7:S225-46. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1100954. Epub 2008 Nov 25.

引用本文的文献

1
A decision-making model for pre-sentence evaluations for juveniles.一种针对青少年判决前评估的决策模型。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2020 May 5;28(1):1-26. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1751332. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power.定性访谈研究中的样本量:以信息力为导向
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444. Epub 2016 Jul 10.
2
Forensic mental health assessment in France: recommendations for quality improvement.法国的法医精神健康评估:质量改进建议。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2014 Nov-Dec;37(6):628-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2014.02.037. Epub 2014 Mar 13.
6
Variables affecting the clarity of psychological reports.
J Clin Psychol. 2006 Jan;62(1):5-18. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20196.
7
Forensic report writing.法医报告撰写。
J Clin Psychol. 2006 Jan;62(1):59-72. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20200.
8
The Delphi technique: myths and realities.德尔菲技术:神话与现实。
J Adv Nurs. 2003 Feb;41(4):376-82. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x.
9
General principles of forensic report writing.法医报告撰写的一般原则。
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2000 Dec;34(6):980-7. doi: 10.1080/000486700273.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验