Forensic Psychiatrist, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
Behav Sci Law. 2020 Mar;38(2):173-185. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2446. Epub 2020 Feb 5.
Following the advent of sexually violent predator (SVP) legislation in the early 1990s, forensic evaluators began to apply diagnostic labels related to a paraphilic interest in rape as a mental condition predisposing individuals convicted of sexual offenses to recidivate. The most recent iteration of the concept, other specified paraphilic disorder (non-consent) (OSPD (non-consent)), is a commonly utilized diagnostic entity in SVP proceedings. Research on paraphilic interest in coercive sex has failed to define a valid methodology or set of criteria to make a diagnosis of OSPD (non-consent) and has repeatedly demonstrated that the diagnostic construct has poor interrater reliability. The state of the science pertaining to OSPD (non-consent) thus raises serious concerns regarding its admissibility in SVP proceedings. Indeed, there are recent cases in which courts have deemed it inadmissible. The forensic expert involved in SVP proceedings should understand admissibility concerns related to OSPD (non-consent) and how to address them in court.
自 20 世纪 90 年代初出现性暴力掠夺者(SVP)立法以来,法医评估人员开始将与强奸癖好相关的诊断标签应用于作为一种心理状态的精神疾病,这种心理状态使被判犯有性犯罪的人更有可能再次犯罪。该概念的最新版本是其他特定恋物癖障碍(非同意)(OSPD(非同意)),这是 SVP 程序中常用的诊断实体。关于强制性性行为恋物癖的研究未能定义有效的方法或一套标准来进行 OSPD(非同意)的诊断,并且一再表明该诊断结构的信度较差。因此,有关 OSPD(非同意)的科学状况引起了人们对其在 SVP 程序中的可采性的严重关注。实际上,最近有一些案件中,法院认为其不可受理。参与 SVP 程序的法医专家应该了解与 OSPD(非同意)相关的可采性问题以及如何在法庭上解决这些问题。