It is my privilege and pleasure to highlight this Special Report on forensic psychiatry. (The first articles in this series appeared in the November issue and are posted on www.psychiatrictimes.com.) The respected authors provide us with the most recent thought on subjects that should be of interest to every practicing psychiatrist.
Practical approaches to integrating 3 aspects of a suicide assessment have been well delineated for adults and adolescents.
While violence is often portrayed in the media as related to persons with mental illnesses, there are limited research data to support this idea. This article reviews laws and obligations for mental health professionals.
The insanity defense represents a prominent symbol of the relationship between law and psychiatry. Despite the fact that it is infrequently raised and seldom successful, the insanity defense is the subject of intense legal and public scrutiny.
After a formal complaint alleging malpractice is made, the discovery phase of the litigation process begins. Discovery is the process in which the parties to a lawsuit go about gathering information before trial. The rationale behind discovery is to reduce surprises at trial and to encourage settlement before trial. Methods of discovery include written interrogatories, requests for documents, and depositions of various witnesses.
Many psychiatrists feel intimidated by or frightened about courtroom testimony. However, with the proper preparation, the psychiatrist need not have a difficult experience. It is the role of an expert witness to educate the court on matters that are beyond a layperson's understanding.
The role of every emergency clinician is to determine whether the patient has a condition that threatens life or limb. Determining this in patients who malinger can be quite a challenge, because the malingering patient presents with false or exaggerated symptoms for secondary gain.
The assessment of malingering presents a significant challenge for mental health clinicians.
Psychiatry is the go-to specialty for determining whether a patient in need of inpatient hospitalization or has an alternative motivation?
Initially, it seemed that the privacy rule for HIPAA would protect patients' privacy, but in reality it has opened the door for insurance companies and hospitals to view private health care information. How can physicians and patients protect their privacy from further erosion?
