Drogenkonsum und Strafrecht

Drug consumption is a criminogenic factor. Almost all unauthorized contacts with narcotic drugs are punishable by German law. Users and dealers tie up significant resources within the judiciary, which in turn often requires help from psycho-scientific experts. Aiming at those experts, this article imparts basic knowledge of the criminal law on narcotics. Furthermore, it is meant to outline the impact of drug consumption on the assessment of offenders’ criminal responsibility as well as on ordering measures for the prevention of crime and the reformation of offenders from the jurisdictional point of view. Moreover, the article discusses the legal consequences of driving under the influence of drugs. Additionally, requirements for expert opinions on the criminal responsibility of drug addicts are summarised.     

Free will: reconciling German civil law with Libet's neurophysiological studies on the readiness potential

The free will debate widely exceeds the neuroscientific and philosophical fields due to profound implications for legislation, case law and psychiatric expert opinion. Data from Benjamin Libet's experiments on the readiness potential have been used as an argument against personal responsibility and for changes in the law. Due to the explicit use of the term "free will" in German civil law, the psychiatrist as an expert witness is confronted with this debate. In this article we outline the role of this crucial term in German civil law and we describe the neurophysiologic challenge in the form of Libet's experiments, which is led on three levels: the correctness of the data, the impact on the question of whether free will exists and possible consequences for the law. We conclude that the problem of free will cannot be debated on the basis of the data provided by Libet's experiments and that doubts about the existence of a free will must not lead to changes in the law or in psychiatric expert testimony. Therefore, advice for the psychiatrist as an expert witness is offered on the basis of a psychopathological approach that takes into account cognitive and motivational preconditions and the structure of values and personality.     

Standards nichtstrafrechtlicher psychiatrischer Begutachtung

The introduction of the certificate for forensic psychiatry of the German Association of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics (DGPPN) in 2000 was a significant contribution to raising awareness of the formal and substantive requirements for forensic psychiatric evaluations and to develop a systematic quality improvement in forensic psychiatric expert services. By the special dominance of the certification in the field of penal law assessment, this proved to be problematic for many predominantly non-penal experts. This led to a requirement to develop a qualification for the non-penal expert opinions. In particular the increasing specialization of the psychiatric disciplines and the diversity of the legal issues and framework require a continuing education in the field of non-penal psychiatric assessments. Substantive and formal requirements are discussed and a continuous process of quality improvement and assurance is outlined. Last but not least a plea is made for close interdisciplinary exchange with the jurisprudence and the courts in the context of quality circles.     

Die Sachverständigenexpertise im Spannungsfeld zwischen Justiz und Psychiatrie am Beispiel des Hangbegriffes des § 66 StGB (Sicherungsverwahrung)

Using the example of psychiatric expert opinions in trials leading to preventive detention, we analysed how far the corresponding orders by the courts were suited to guide the psychiatric experts and restrict them to their area of expertise. Furthermore we concentrated on the question, what reasons were given for preventive detention on both psychiatric and judicial side and how psychiatric arguments were adopted by the judges. Our results show clearly, that placing an order with the psychiatric expert as well as adopting the psychiatric arguments for preventive detention occur mainly in a stereotypic way. Psychiatric and judicial arguments for preventive detention refer both to previous delinquency. Aspects concerning the offenders personality appear to be secondary, although they play a major role in the decision for preventive detention. The article shows the controversy associated with forensic-psychiatric expertise in the courtroom and the need for communication and clarification between psychiatry and law.     

Empathy or objectivity: The forensic examiner's dilemma?

Examiners are ethically bound to manage personal biases that may infect their expert opinions. Empathy‐related issues that lead to bias in forensic assessment of adjudicative competence arise in evaluation interactions with defendants (therapeutic empathy) and from examiners' personal views of issues that these assessments address (empathy‐bias). This article first summarizes flexible adjudicative competence legal standards that invite bias by forensic experts. Then, after reviewing the therapeutic empathy issue, the article examines empathy‐bias and its effects on the development of expert opinions. The authors assert that, properly managed, the often assumed dilemma between empathy and objectivity is a false one. Using case law, research psychology, and professional guidelines, the authors first emphasize that examiners must actively generate plausible alternative explanations of evaluation data as they form their opinions, not afterwards. Then the authors present a practical model to help experts develop opinions that best explain the data while minimizing empathy‐bias. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Qualifizierung und Qualitätskontrolle in der forensischen Psychiatrie – die aktuelle Situation in der Schweiz

The practice of civil expert opinions in Switzerland is in a period of upheaval due to fundamental alterations regarding the legal foundations which were implemented on 1 January 2013. The new civil code displaces the authority to order measures which restrict people’s liberty based on an endangerment to themselves or third parties from a lay institution to a newly created expert committee. Moreover, patient’s rights are greatly enhanced. The subsequent consequences for expert opinion activities are not yet appraisable. The development in the practice of insurance legal expert opinion is influenced by new legal measures which aim at reducing the growing number of new disability retirements most notably due to psychiatric disorders. In contrast to the civil area there are already clearly defined standards for the insurance legal area which were established by the Swiss Society of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy in 2012. The legal foundations as well as the practice of expert opinions in the context of the Swiss civil and insurance law are comparable with the German situation but there are still some important differences related to the content and terminology. This paper outlines the current situation and recent developments in Switzerland as well as pointing out differences in comparison to Germany.     

Berufliche Leistungsfähigkeit

In different fields of law the assessment of capability of performance is important and often poses a particular challenge for medical or psychological experts. The present article introduces a model for the assessment of capability of performance developed on the background of a multicenter and interdisciplinary research project. This approach of assessment assumes that the performance capability of a person with psychiatric or psychosomatic disorders does not arise from symptomatology alone; instead, it is also a consequence of interactions between coping processes of the individual and environmental factors. The presented model of the assessment of performance capability is mainly oriented to the “International Classification of Functioning” (ICF; WHO) whose central diagnostic categories are, in addition to the disorder and the somatic and psychiatric functions, the levels of activity and participation. The different assessing levels are operationalized in the assessment model. In this article the various diagnostic levels and their interactions and the criteria which have been formulated are described. The process of decision-making is explored as well. This assessment model aims to make a more reliable, valid and transparent process of expert decision-making in order to increase the objectivity and justice of the assessment procedure.     

Leugnen der Tat und Tatbearbeitung in der prognostischen Begutachtung

The perpetrator’s examination of his own criminal actions seems to be very important for the risk assessment by the German criminal justice and psychological and psychiatric experts. At the same time other risk factors like general dissociality, the structure of the future neighbourhood, the patterns of social bindings, and personal core competencies seem to be more important for the prevention of criminal recidivism. Anyway the analysis of one’s own criminal offence may enlighten the individual attitudes and behavioral problems and thus may become an important domain of cognitive restructuring. If a convict still denies his deed this not necessarily makes a parole impossible. Denial may indicate a general hostility against the law, but in other cases it is caused by overwhelming shame and indicates positive bindings to social norms.     

Qualitätssicherung von Gerichtsgutachten im Familienrecht

In recent years many controversial verdicts and studies have brought discussions about the quality of expert opinions in family law into the focus of the media, political and expert public spheres. With the coalition contract, the ruling parties agreed on improving the quality of expert opinions, especially in the sector of family law, in collaboration with professional institutions. Representatives of the legal, psychological and medical associations, the Federal Bar Association and the Federal Chamber of Psychotherapists worked out guidelines for expert opinions in family law in cooperation with the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection. The three main quality assurance aspects are scientifically founded procedures, transparency and traceability. These requirements are concretely illustrated in this article with recommendations concerning the procedure and composition of expert opinions.     

Expert testimony on malingering: The admissibility of clinical procedures for the detection of deception

The detection of malingering in the legal context frequently requires the use of psychiatric and psychological expert testimony. These experts may rely on certain clinical techniques in order to detect deception. This article addresses the problem of the admissibility in evidence of clinical procedures used by these experts. The scientific reliability and effect on constitutional rights of procedures such as hypnosis, polygraphy, “truth” drugs, and psychological tests is examined.     

Bad or Mad? Personality disorders and legal responsibility-the German situation

Criminal offenders have a high rate of personality disorders (PDS), especially Antisocial Personality Disorders and psychopathy, but criminal acts are not necessarily the result of PD. Findings from psychiatric research suggest that the development of PD is influenced by genetic factors, that can result in deviant traits in temper, emotionality and cognitive style. There is general agreement that those peculiarities and vulnerabilities find their expression and structure only under a complex interplay of stimulating or impairing environmental influences. Do these genetic factors-or other factors-diminish a person's criminal responsibility? There is no difficulty in diagnosing PDs, but the challenging questions arise in forensic assessments of defendants for criminal responsibility who have a PD. This article discusses the German legal situation and special problems created by the term of "diminished" criminal responsibility. In contrast to the Anglo-American legal situation, the German criminal law obliges the court to order an indeterminate forensic - psychiatric confinement, in addition to punishment, if the offender had acted under diminished criminal responsibility and is now still considered to be dangerous. The convicted offender remains under the control of the criminal court during psychiatric hospitalization. The change from handling the personality disordered offender as a criminal to handling him as someone with a mental disorder creates a social option for extended state interventions, including indeterminate hospitalization.     

Expert Trespassing Testimony and the Ethics of Science Communication

Scientific expert testimony is crucial to public deliberation, but it is associated with many pitfalls. This article identifies one—namely, expert trespassing testimony—which may be characterized, crudely, as the phenomenon of experts testifying outside their domain of expertise. My agenda is to provide a more precise characterization of this phenomenon and consider its ramifications for the role of science in society. I argue that expert trespassing testimony is both epistemically problematic and morally problematic. Specifically, I will argue that scientific experts are subject to a particular obligation. Roughly, this is the obligation to qualify their assertions when speaking outside their domain of scientific expertise in certain contexts. Thus, I argue that scientists who possess expert knowledge are confronted with hard questions about when and how to testify and, therefore, that being a scientific expert comes with great responsibility. Consequently, I provide a concrete “expert guideline” according to which scientific experts, in certain contexts, face an obligation to qualify their assertions when speaking outside their domain of expertise. Furthermore, I consider a number of the conditions in which the guideline is waived or overridden. On this basis, I consider the broader aspects of the roles of scientific experts in a society with a high division of cognitive labor that calls for trust in scientific expert testimony.     

Bias and expert testimony of mental health professionals in adversarial proceedings: A preliminary investigation

The role of mental health professionals testifying as expert witnesses has been the subject of increasing criticism. Cases in which opposing experts reach different conclusions are dismissed as “battles of the experts” and psychologists and psychiatrists are described as “hired guns.” This preliminary, analogue study examined the degree to which the opinions and testimony of mental health professionals may differ according to which side retains the expert. Results provided some support for the proposition that mental health professionals' testimony may vary according to the side by which they are retained.     

An integration of process and decision scheme explanations of group problem solving performance

This article develops a model of group problem solving in which performance is a function of group resources and strategies for their use. Resources are defined as the joint task knowledge of a group's two most expert members. Decision scheme is essentially defined as the degree of influence of these two experts and is shown, for certain composition conditions, to be related to group process, specifically, effective conflict management. Similarities between the model and other social influence theories are examined, and implications for organizational problem solving are explored. The task is the “Moon Survival” problem, and the subjects are 102 managers and graduate management students, working in 21 groups.     

Factors associated with experts' opinions regarding criminal responsibility in The Netherlands

In many jurisdictions, offenders need to have freely chosen to commit their crimes in order to be punishable. A mental defect or disorder may be a reason for diminished or total absence of criminal responsibility and may remove culpability. This study aims to provide an empirically based understanding of the factors on which experts base their judgements concerning criminal responsibility. Clinical, demographic and crime related variables, as well as MMPI-2 profiles, were collected from final reports concerning defendants of serious crime submitted to the observation clinic of the Dutch Ministry of Justice for a criminal responsibility assessment. Criminal responsibility was expressed along a five-point scale corresponding to the Dutch legal practice. Results showed that several variables contributed independently to experts' opinions regarding criminal responsibility: diagnosis (Axis I and II), cultural background, type of weapon used in committing the crime, and whether the defendant committed the crime alone or with others. In contract to jurisdictions involving a sane/insane dichotomy, the Dutch five-point scale of criminal responsibility revealed that Axis II personality disorders turned out to be mostly associated with a diminished responsibility. MMPI-2 scores also turned out to have a small contribution to experts' opinions on criminal responsibility, independently of mere diagnostic variables. These results suggest that experts base their judgements not only on the presence or absence of mental disorders, but also on cultural and crime related characteristics, as well as dimensional information about the defendant's personality and symptomatology.     

Tell Me What I Wanted to Hear: Confirmation Effect in Lay Evaluations of Financial Expert Authority

In real life, people engage in interactive decision processes by consulting with experts. However, before taking advice, they must recognise the authority of an expert to assess the quality of the advice. The main goal of this research was to investigate how the confirmation effect affects lay evaluations of the epistemic authority of financial experts. Experiment 1 showed that lay people tend to ascribe greater epistemic authority to those experts whose advice confirms people's opinions, both measured and manipulated. Experiment 2 revealed that when participants' own opinions are not salient, people tend to evaluate experts' authority as higher when their advice confirms social norms. In Experiment 3 we jointly investigated the effects of participants' own opinions and social norms on the evaluations of authority. When both sources of expertise were made salient, decision‐makers favoured advice confirming their own beliefs and used it to evaluate experts' authority. Three interpretations of the role confirmation plays in the experts' authority evaluations are proposed: (1) self‐defensive strategies; (2) processing fluency; and (3) psychological consequences of naïve realism. The paper discusses practical implications of the results. We propose that increasing consumers' knowledge about biases might protect their evaluations of financial advice from being susceptible to the confirmation effect.     

Confidence in aggregation of expert opinions

We investigate the case of a single decision maker (DM) who obtains probabilistic forecasts regarding the occurrence of a unique target event from J distinct, symmetric, and equally diagnostic expert advisors (judges). The paper begins with a mathematical model of DM's aggregation process of expert opinions, in which confidence in the final aggregate is shown to be inversely related to its perceived variance. As such, confidence is expected to vary as a function of factors such as the number of experts, the total number of cues, the fraction of cues available to each expert, the level of inter-expert overlap in information, and the range of experts' opinions. In the second part of the paper, we present results from two experiments that support the main (ordinal) predictions of the model.     

Qualit?tssicherung in der forensischen Psychologie

Approximately 12 years ago the German Federation of Psychological Societies initiated a certified postgraduate training in psychology and law to qualify psychologists as forensic psychology experts. This qualification initiative was a consequence of a decade of evaluative research constantly yielding serious shortcomings in psychiatric and psychological expert reports. The present paper informs about the conception of the training and the experiences with it so far. Furthermore, it reports on current reform efforts regarding the training and informs about some further forensic psychological qualification options that have meanwhile been established in Germany.     

基于安戈夫法的青少年问题性移动社交网络使用评估标准

摘 要 使用安戈夫法界定青少年问题性移动社交网络使用评估标准。结果发现,筛查评估问卷中8个及以上题目持肯定回答即可评估为问题性移动社交网络使用,实证区分效度中正常使用者检出率为12%,问题性使用者检出率为91.1%。基于安戈夫法的青少年问题性移动社交网络使用评估工具有较好的心理学测量属性,可用于青少年问题性移动社交网络使用的筛查评估。