A teen court evaluation with a therapeutic jurisprudence perspective

Teen court defendants were assessed on several attitudinal measures when they entered and when they completed their teen court program. Teen court volunteers and high school civics students in a control group were assessed on the same measures at two points in time that approximated the length of teen court involvement for defendants. Re-offense rates for defendants were assessed. In addition, defendants and their parents completed satisfaction surveys. The teen court experience did not significantly impact the attitudes and beliefs of either the defendants or the volunteers. The re-offense rate for defendants was 13%, which is similar to other teen court programs and less than the re-offense rate for the general diversion program in the county that was the target of the study. Since this teen court selected youth with the least serious delinquency activity (primarily shoplifting), conclusions about the program's effectiveness in reducing further offending cannot be made. Defendants and their parents reported high levels of satisfaction with their teen court experience but defendants became more alienated from institutional authority. This study did not support the teen court experience as having a generally beneficial impact on defendants or volunteers that would be expected from a therapeutic jurisprudence perspective.     

Therapeutic jurisprudence in the courts

Therapeutic jurisprudence is an emerging field of law and social science inquiry that explores the role of the law in fostering therapeutic or antitherapeutic outcomes. This article considers the relationship between therapeutic jurisprudence and court performance goals, examines applications of therapeutic jurisprudence in court settings, discusses the steps involved in incorporating therapeutic jurisprudence principles into the work of courts, outlines the pros and cons associated with practicing therapeutic jurisprudence primarily in specialized courts, and offers suggestions for fostering continued experimentation by courts.     

Therapeutic jurisprudence and changing conceptions of legal scholarship

This article traces changes in the nature of legal scholarship and illustrates how therapeutic jurisprudence reflects changing conceptions of the law and legal scholarship. It argues that therapeutic jurisprudence may be regarded as a mental health law counterpart to ?New Public Law,”? and shows that questions asked by therapeutic jurisprudence scholars parallel closely those asked by public law scholars.     

Refusing to apologize can have psychological benefits (and we issue no mea culpa for this research finding)

Despite an understanding of the perception and consequences of apologies for their recipients, little is known about the consequences of interpersonal apologies, or their denial, for the offending actor. In two empirical studies, we examined the unexplored psychological consequences that follow from a harm‐doer's explicit refusal to apologize. Results showed that the act of refusing to apologize resulted in greater self‐esteem than not refusing to apologize. Moreover, apology refusal also resulted in increased feelings of power/control and value integrity, both of which mediated the effect of refusal on self‐esteem. These findings point to potential barriers to victim–offender reconciliation after an interpersonal harm, highlighting the need to better understand the psychology of harm‐doers and their defensive behavior for self‐focused motives. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Frozen narratives? Post‐divorce processes and contact disputes

The aim of this paper is to explore some interactive processes and constraints as adults and children develop new narratives post-divorce. It will look at how adults' narratives can become more rigid or frozen over time as a result of battles within the legal system, and the effect this can have on children. Dilemmas and contradictions for therapists attempting to bring about change in the context of an assessment will be discussed, as will the challenge of introducing therapeutic 'understanding-based' language into an adversarial system organized around 'evidence-based' language. The therapeutic work described takes place in the context of court assessments of children whose parents are engaged in disputes over contact. Case vignettes will be used to illustrate the processes described, and dilemmas for therapists will be discussed as they position themselves in relation to conflicting narratives.     

Amnesia and criminal law: A clinical overview

The use of amnesia as a legal defense raises complex issues for both psychology and jurisprudence. Our review of the legal literature suggests that recent advances in the understanding of clinical disorders of memory have not yet found their way into the courtroom. In this paper, we address the assumptions that amnesia means simply having a very bad memory and that amnesia is a unitary syndrome. We then review recent neuropsychological research on amnesia and its implications for the judicial process. Emphasis is placed on describing the amnesic disorders that most often arise in criminal proceedings. It is concluded that both psychologists and legal professionals should ensure that research findings from the clinic and the laboratory are applied appropriately in cases of defendants claiming amnesia.     

Neonaticide: an appropriate application for therapeutic jurisprudence?

Might therapeutic jurisprudence, a perspective that attempts to study interaction between the legal and mental health disciplines, be brought to bear effectively with respect to neonaticide, the murder of a newborn infant in the first 24 hours of its life? This is a crime that leads to sentencing that is now rarely therapeutic, rehabilitative, or corrective. An examination of the crime, its motives, and its perpetrators precedes a discussion of ways in which the mental health viewpoint in this matter might be brought to the active attention of the courts in order to promote sentencing that is appropriate to both the crime and the transgressor. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Emergency Research without Consent under Polish Law

Although Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use does not contain an exception for emergency situations, and requires the informed consent of a legal representative in all cases where research is conducted on legally competent individuals who are unable to give informed consent, in Poland, emergency research can be conducted without consent. Polish regulations on emergency research can hardly be treated as a result of intentional legislative policy. Our provisions arise from multiple and sophisticated interpretations of different regulations that govern medical experiments on human subjects and clinical trials. These interpretations can be summarized as follows: (1) There are two categories of medical experiments: therapeutic and non-therapeutic experiments. Emergency research without consent may be conducted in the category of therapeutic experiment only (therapeutic experiment consists of the introduction by the physician of new or only partially proven diagnostic, therapeutic or preventive methods in order to achieve direct benefit to the health of the patients, and it can be carried out when hitherto applied methods were ineffective or their effectiveness was insufficient). (2). Emergency research may be conducted without consent if there is a situation of great urgency in which the research subject's life is in danger and there is no possibility of obtaining immediate consent from the research subject him or herself, or from his or her legal representative or guardianship court, and the research subject has not refused to give consent for the participation in an emergency therapeutic experiment. The legal representative or guardianship court shall be provided with all the relevant information concerning subject's participation in an experiment as soon as possible. All projects of emergency research with intent to be done without the research subject's consent must be approved by an independent bioethics committee. Because these five requirements seem to provide insufficient protection for a subject's autonomy and rights it is necessary to add to them two other conditions: (1) the emergency research could not be conducted using other research participants capable of giving informed consent; and (2) informed consent for continued participation in the emergency research shall be obtained from either the participant him or herself or the legally authorized representative as soon as possible (requirement of obtaining deferred consent). A consolidated single Act that will govern all aspects of medical experiments on human subjects, including emergency research, should be prepared and enacted as soon as possible.     

Confirmatory Analyses of the School Refusal Assessment Scale-Revised: Replication and Extension to a Truancy Sample

School absenteeism and school refusal behavior are prevalent and serious issues for youth, but few measures have been developed specifically for this population. The School Refusal Assessment Scale-Revised (child and parent versions) provides clinicians with a profile of the relative strength of four functions or maintaining variables regarding school refusal behavior. The scales have been previously tested largely on clinical samples in outpatient treatment settings, however. This study examined 216 youth with primary school refusal behavior and their parent/guardian referred to a community-based truancy court or truancy diversion setting for problematic absenteeism. The four-factor structure of the scales (Kearney Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 24:235–245, 2002a; Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 28:139–144, 2006) was supported via confirmatory factor analysis and specific functions were associated with specific symptom sets as predicted. The results help extend the generalizability of the scales to youths and their families who are more ethnically diverse and referred to a legal process.     

Family Influences on Treatment Refusal in School-linked Mental Health Services

This study analyzed family influences on treatment refusal in school-linked mental health services (SLMHS). Specifically, it assessed whether levels of family cohesion, conflict, and organization were related to whether a family refused to initiate recommended treatment. Children (N = 133) referred for emotional and behavioral problems and their families participated. Results indicated that (1) family environment factors explained a significant amount of variance in treatment refusal after controlling for demographic factors, (2) families of children with predominantly internalizing symptoms were at greater risk for refusing treatment than families of children with predominantly externalizing symptoms, and (3) lower level of family cohesion was an individual risk factor for refusing treatment. Incorporating an evaluation of family environment within SLMHS assessments may aid in the identification of areas wherein intervention may be beneficial in preventing treatment refusal.     

American legal realism and sociological jurisprudence: The methodological roots of a science of law

There remains a good deal of confusion concerning the respective roles legal realism and sociological jurisprudence played in the movement to demythologize the study of law in the United States. It is asserted that this confusion is the result of a failure to recognize that American legal realism was part of the intellectual tradition of the thennew behavioral sciences–in particular, adopting as its methodological premise the ideal of a divorce between the study of fact and value. In contrast, sociological jurisprudence under the influence of Roscoe Pound, relied upon the tradition of pragmatic philosophy, ultimately denying that the realist's separation was either possible or desirable. As such, American legal realism should be seen as the true precursor of more modern attempts to engage in the study of judicial behavioralism and to attempt more scientific studies of the judicial process.     

From therapeutic jurisprudence...to jurisprudent therapy

For nearly a decade, "therapeutic jurisprudence" (TJ) has provided a theoretical framework within which legal rules, legal procedure, and legal roles are analyzed in terms of their therapeutic, neutral, or antitherapeutic effects. This article proposed "jurisprudent therapy" (JT), an extension of the TJ model, as a context for analyzing mental health science, mental health practice, and mental health roles in terms of their "jurisprudent," neutral, or "antijurisprudent" effects. The JT perspective neither supplants nor supersedes TJ; rather, it mirrors and augments an established process for interdisciplinary contrast, comparison, and integration. Just as an empathic and evolving legal system provides psychological benefits, so does a legally informed and juridically compatible progression of social science promote principles of justice and human freedom. Consideration of these two complementary models in tandem yields an array of brainstorming devices, to synergistic effect, with heuristic implications for teaching, research, and service delivery.     

Moral Judgment in Extreme Social Contexts: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight and Physicians Who Strike?1

This paper compares two examples of moral action within extreme social contexts: the refusal of Israeli reserve soldiers to perform their military service during the war in Lebanon (1982–1983), and the refusal of Israeli physicians to provide medical care during a “labor war”, that is a strike. This paper examines the cognitive developmental premise that with an increase in the actors' stage of moral development there will be a greater consistency between hypothetical and actual moral reasoning (Kohlberg, 1984). Blasi's (1983) concept of personal integrity, that is, the consistency between the actors' judgment concerning the morality of an action and the action that was actually performed, is examined as well. The findings show that the “refusing” soldiers manifested stage consistency in their action, whereas the physicians failed to justify their action in line with their moral competence. Whereas the soldiers viewed their action as highly moral, the physicians viewed their strike action as unfortunate but necessary. The motivation of the two groups of actors to act in line with their behavioral choices is discussed.     

Islamic law and human rights: A contribution to an ongoing debate

In this essay the author criticizes two opposite approaches to the relationship between Islam and human rights: the incriminating and the apologetic approach. They are either anachronistic in that they judge the rules of classical Islamic jurisprudence by present‐day standards, or they entirely ignore its heritage. The author attempts instead to develop a new approach whereby classical Islamic jurisprudence is analyzed in its historical context. In order to examine whether Islam recognized a notion of fundamental rights, the author first tries to establish to what extent the notion of legal equality is recognized in Islamic law. Secondly, he examines two hierarchical legal relationships, viz. that between master and slave and that between husband and wife, in order to find which basic and inalienable rights Islamic law assigns to the weaker party in these relationships. His conclusion is that classical Islamic law offers points of departure for the development of a modern theory of human rights rooted in Islamic notions.>     

Interpretive flexibility: why doesn't insight incite controversy in mental health law?

This research investigates how the term "insight" was employed in 25 decisions from mental health review proceedings in Victoria, Australia. The application of insight appears problematic in these decisions. First, there is little clarification of its meaning. Second, the logic applied when insight is related to compliance is often unclear. Third, there are frequent allusions to an implicit and undefined scale of insight, offering the appearance of objectivity. We have analysed insight as an 'interpretive resource', focusing on its various functions in the complex social context of commitment hearings and with a view to its therapeutic jurisprudence implications. The variable application of insight-its interpretive flexibility-appears useful in addressing complex problems faced by review boards. Hence, a key function of insight is to bridge between legal and clinical discourses. Insight is also a convenient means to avoid complicated debates regarding the person's credibility. By analysing insight in Victoria, we hope to contribute to better theoretical understanding of decision-making patterns in mental health law in general.     

Incarceration, Restitution, and Lifetime Debarment: Legal Consequences of Scientific Misconduct in the Eric Poehlman Case

Following its determination of a finding of scientific misconduct the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) will seek redress for any injury sustained. Several remedies both administrative and statutory may be available depending on the strength of the evidentiary findings of the misconduct investigation. Pursuant to federal regulations administrative remedies are primarily remedial in nature and designed to protect the integrity of the affected research program, whereas statutory remedies including civil fines and criminal penalties are designed to deter and punish wrongdoers. This commentary discusses the available administrative and statutory remedies in the context of a specific case, that of former University of Vermont nutrition researcher Eric Poehlman, and supplies a possible rationale for the legal result.     

Legal and Ethical Issues in the Court-Mandated Treatment of Batterers

Summary

In the following article, we will explore the nature of the therapeutic relationship as it relates to batterers' treatment programs. We will consider the impact of obligations created by forces outside the relationship, such as those imposed by legal proceedings. We will discuss the concepts of confidentiality, privilege, and agency and their impact on the therapeutic relationship and the extent to which the therapists' understanding of the role these concepts play may be altered by court orders that impose treatment on a client/patient. Finally, we examine the issues and choices a therapist must make when engaging in court-ordered treatment of batterers, and the implications of those choices for both therapist and client; we will also suggest guidelines to help therapists sort through the often conflicting goals of therapy and the legal process.     

On the witness stand:

Abstract

The family therapist is frequently called upon to testify as an expert witness. For many family therapists, the courtroom is an unfamiliar environment with different ground rules and basic assumptions. Testifying can be a difficult experience as the mental health professional faces different situational role demands than those encountered in usual therapeutic settings. If the family therapist can transfer to the court context the art of influencing interpersonal situations, the effectiveness of his/her testimony will be enhanced. This paper describes predictable legal behaviors and suggests to the family therapist strategic responses to improve skills as an expert witness.     

Psychological evaluations in the criminal justice system: Basic principles and best practices

Forensic psychologists are frequently called upon to conduct evaluations for competency to stand trial, insanity defense, or prediction of future dangerousness. Psychological evaluations for the court typically include record review, clinical examination of the defendant, interview of collaterals, psychological testing, and preparation of a written report. Psychological forensic examiners may also be called upon to testify in court. In rendering their conclusions, forensic examiners should conduct a careful analysis of each individual case, not rely on the mere presence, absence, or severity of any mental disorder to make a legal determination.