Publication

Avoiding Expert Opinions on the Ultimate Legal Question: The Case for Integrity

Tillbrook, Chad E.
Mumley, Denise L.
Grisso, Thomas
Citations
Altmetric:
Student Authors
Faculty Advisor
Academic Program
UMass Chan Affiliations
Document Type
Journal Article
Publication Date
2003-06-01
Subject Area
Embargo Expiration Date
Abstract

In this article, we argue against testifying to the ultimate legal issue. There is no basis in science or clinical knowledge for determining the degree of capacity that is required in order to reach the threshold of capacity associated with legal questions such as competency and criminal responsibility. Society qualifies mental health professionals to provide expert testimony on the basis of their clinical and scientific expertise. Thus testifying to the ultimate legal issue is inappropriate and illogical and to do so threatens the integrity of mental health professions and the legal process.

Source

Tillbrook, C., Mumley, D. & Grisso, T. (2003). Avoiding Expert Opinions on the Ultimate Legal Question: The Case for Integrity. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 3(3), 77-87. doi:10.1300/J158v03n03_05

Year of Medical School at Time of Visit
Sponsors
Dates of Travel
DOI
10.1300/J158v03n03_05
PubMed ID
Other Identifiers
Notes
Funding and Acknowledgements
Corresponding Author
Related Resources
Related Resources
Repository Citation
Rights
Distribution License