• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

Utilizing therapists to obtain death penalty verdicts.

作者信息

Weinstock R

机构信息

School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles 90024-155605.

出版信息

Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1994;22(1):39-52.

PMID:8193387
Abstract

As a result of recent decisions by the United States and California Supreme Courts, therapists now have been placed in a position in which they can be forced to testify in death penalty cases for the only purposes of achieving a conviction and a death penalty verdict. Zeal for the death penalty seems to have overcome any concern for the ethics of psychiatrists or even for the welfare of society. In California, therapists can now be forced to testify against their own patients in capital cases even if the patient does not tender his mental state as an issue, despite the presence of a psychotherapist-patient privilege in the state for criminal matters. In California, the only option for therapists who wish to treat potentially dangerous patients may be to conduct the therapy under the umbrella of attorney-client privilege. Otherwise they may not be able to avoid serious ethical problems and personal danger if the patient actually does kill someone during or after therapy. They may be unable honestly and ethically to treat such patients without obtaining truly informed consent to therapy under these potentially "undercover policeman" circumstances. Hopefully, professional organizations will take a more activist position, and courts will appreciate the folly of these decisions and reverse them. Otherwise, they may spread to other states, for which California frequently sets precedents.

摘要

相似文献

1
Utilizing therapists to obtain death penalty verdicts.
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1994;22(1):39-52.
2
Psychiatry and the death penalty: the landmark Supreme Court cases and their ethical implications for the profession.精神病学与死刑:具有里程碑意义的最高法院判例及其对该专业的伦理影响。
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1994;22(1):95-108.
3
[Role of psychiatrists in capital punishment cases : a review].[精神科医生在死刑案件中的作用:综述]
Seishin Shinkeigaku Zasshi. 2002;104(3):229-40.
4
Court responses to Tarasoff statutes.法院对塔萨罗夫法规的回应。
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2004;32(3):263-73.
5
[The origin of informed consent].[知情同意的起源]
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2005 Oct;25(5):312-27.
6
The ethics of the Texas death penalty and its impact on a prolonged appeals process.德克萨斯州死刑的伦理问题及其对漫长上诉程序的影响。
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1998;26(4):655-60.
7
The tort liability of the psychiatrist.精神科医生的侵权责任。
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1975;3(4):191-230.
8
Attorney work product privilege trumps mandated child abuse reporting law: The case of Elijah W. v. Superior Court.律师工作成果特权优先于强制儿童虐待报告法:以伊利亚·W.诉高等法院案为例。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2015 Sep-Dec;42-43:43-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.08.006. Epub 2015 Sep 26.
9
Limiting the psychotherapist-patient privilege: the therapeutic potential.限制心理治疗师与患者之间的特权:治疗潜力。
Crim Law Bull. 1991 Sep-Oct;27(5):416-33.
10
Psychiatry and the death penalty.精神病学与死刑
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2006 Sep;29(3):791-804. doi: 10.1016/j.psc.2006.04.002.