Publikation:

Expert opinions on criminal law cases in Switzerland : an empirical pilot study

Lade...
Vorschaubild

Dateien

Datum

2023

Autor:innen

Bevilacqua, Leonie
Calfisch, Adriano
Hachtel, Henning
Graf, Marc

Herausgeber:innen

Kontakt

ISSN der Zeitschrift

Electronic ISSN

ISBN

Bibliografische Daten

Verlag

Schriftenreihe

Auflagebezeichnung

ArXiv-ID

Internationale Patentnummer

Link zur Lizenz

Angaben zur Forschungsförderung

Projekt

Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Gold
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz

Gesperrt bis

Titel in einer weiteren Sprache

Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published

Erschienen in

Swiss Medical Weekly. SMW Supporting Association. 2023, 153(5), 40073. ISSN 1424-7860. eISSN 1424-3997. Available under: doi: 10.57187/smw.2023.40073

Zusammenfassung

BACKGROUND Criminal courts of law rely on forensic psychiatric/psychological reports when clarifying legal questions of culpability, dangerousness, and the need for therapeutic measures for offenders. Incorrect decisions owing to a lack of expert report quality and comprehensibility can have serious consequences for potential victims, offenders themselves, or societal use of resources. In this pilot study, we started from the hypothesis that forensic psychiatric/psychological reports meet the minimum requirements for legally admissible expert opinions. METHODS Within the framework of assessment by the Concordat Expert Commission of Northwestern and Central Switzerland, 58 adult criminal law reports were randomly selected. Two researchers extracted and analyzed standardized data descriptively. For quality assurance, they followed the extended codebook of the Research and Development Department of the Zürich Office of Corrections and Reintegration. RESULTS Psychopathological findings accounted for only 1% of the reports, which seemed problematic considering that these findings reflect the personality traits of offenders. Furthermore, only 7% of offenders underwent physical examinations, and the reasons for not performing physical examinations were noted in fewer than half of these offenders. Of 26 sexual offenders, only one was physically assessed. Additional imaging or neurophysiological examinations (e.g. electroencephalogram) were conducted in only one offender. Furthermore, published baseline recidivism rates were used in only 37.9% of the reports. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study suggest that current forensic psychiatric assessment is deficient. The infrequent use of published recidivism rates for risk communication denies prosecutors and judges solid reference values for the actual recidivism probability. Moving away from somatic medicine contradicts the federal court judgment, which disqualifies psychologists from providing a forensic report owing to their lack of expertise in physical examination. The authors recommend the multidisciplinary involvement of forensic psychiatrists and psychologists and, in certain cases, of specialists in somatic medicine to produce accurate and well-founded reports.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

Fachgebiet (DDC)
150 Psychologie

Schlagwörter

General Medicine, criminal law, switzerland, pilot study

Konferenz

Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined

Forschungsvorhaben

Organisationseinheiten

Zeitschriftenheft

Zugehörige Datensätze in KOPS

Zitieren

ISO 690BEVILACQUA, Leonie, Adriano CALFISCH, Jérôme ENDRASS, Astrid ROSSEGGER, Henning HACHTEL, Marc GRAF, 2023. Expert opinions on criminal law cases in Switzerland : an empirical pilot study. In: Swiss Medical Weekly. SMW Supporting Association. 2023, 153(5), 40073. ISSN 1424-7860. eISSN 1424-3997. Available under: doi: 10.57187/smw.2023.40073
BibTex
@article{Bevilacqua2023-05-16Exper-68276,
  year={2023},
  doi={10.57187/smw.2023.40073},
  title={Expert opinions on criminal law cases in Switzerland : an empirical pilot study},
  number={5},
  volume={153},
  issn={1424-7860},
  journal={Swiss Medical Weekly},
  author={Bevilacqua, Leonie and Calfisch, Adriano and Endrass, Jérôme and Rossegger, Astrid and Hachtel, Henning and Graf, Marc},
  note={Article Number: 40073}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/68276">
    <dc:creator>Hachtel, Henning</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:title>Expert opinions on criminal law cases in Switzerland : an empirical pilot study</dcterms:title>
    <dc:contributor>Hachtel, Henning</dc:contributor>
    <dc:contributor>Bevilacqua, Leonie</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Graf, Marc</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Bevilacqua, Leonie</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
    <dcterms:abstract>BACKGROUND
Criminal courts of law rely on forensic psychiatric/psychological reports when clarifying legal questions of culpability, dangerousness, and the need for therapeutic measures for offenders. Incorrect decisions owing to a lack of expert report quality and comprehensibility can have serious consequences for potential victims, offenders themselves, or societal use of resources. In this pilot study, we started from the hypothesis that forensic psychiatric/psychological reports meet the minimum requirements for legally admissible expert opinions.
METHODS
Within the framework of assessment by the Concordat Expert Commission of Northwestern and Central Switzerland, 58 adult criminal law reports were randomly selected. Two researchers extracted and analyzed standardized data descriptively. For quality assurance, they followed the extended codebook of the Research and Development Department of the Zürich Office of Corrections and Reintegration.
RESULTS
Psychopathological findings accounted for only 1% of the reports, which seemed problematic considering that these findings reflect the personality traits of offenders. Furthermore, only 7% of offenders underwent physical examinations, and the reasons for not performing physical examinations were noted in fewer than half of these offenders. Of 26 sexual offenders, only one was physically assessed. Additional imaging or neurophysiological examinations (e.g. electroencephalogram) were conducted in only one offender. Furthermore, published baseline recidivism rates were used in only 37.9% of the reports.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study suggest that current forensic psychiatric assessment is deficient. The infrequent use of published recidivism rates for risk communication denies prosecutors and judges solid reference values for the actual recidivism probability. Moving away from somatic medicine contradicts the federal court judgment, which disqualifies psychologists from providing a forensic report owing to their lack of expertise in physical examination. The authors recommend the multidisciplinary involvement of forensic psychiatrists and psychologists and, in certain cases, of specialists in somatic medicine to produce accurate and well-founded reports.</dcterms:abstract>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/68276"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2023-11-20T08:49:32Z</dcterms:available>
    <dc:contributor>Endrass, Jérôme</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dc:creator>Calfisch, Adriano</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Calfisch, Adriano</dc:contributor>
    <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/68276/1/Bevilacqua_2-1gsj4nma5yjy46.pdf"/>
    <dc:creator>Endrass, Jérôme</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2023-11-20T08:49:32Z</dc:date>
    <dc:contributor>Rossegger, Astrid</dc:contributor>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:contributor>Graf, Marc</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/68276/1/Bevilacqua_2-1gsj4nma5yjy46.pdf"/>
    <dc:creator>Rossegger, Astrid</dc:creator>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/43"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2023-05-16</dcterms:issued>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Interner Vermerk

xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter

Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.

Prüfdatum der URL

Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation

Finanzierungsart

Kommentar zur Publikation

Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Ja
Diese Publikation teilen