Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChristopher, Paul P.
dc.contributor.authorArikan, Rasim
dc.contributor.authorPinals, Debra A.
dc.contributor.authorFisher, William H.
dc.contributor.authorAppelbaum, Paul S.
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:24.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:07:38Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:07:38Z
dc.date.issued2011-06-01
dc.date.submitted2012-05-16
dc.identifier.citation<p>J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2011;39(2):183-8.</p>
dc.identifier.issn1093-6793 (Linking)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/45390
dc.description.abstractThe task of evaluating psychiatric disability poses several ethics-related and practical challenges for psychiatrists, especially when they are responding to a request from a third party for a disability evaluation on their own patient. This study sought to evaluate the differences in how forensic and nonforensic psychiatrists approach and view evaluations for Social Security disability benefits. Thirty-two forensic and 75 nonforensic psychiatrists were surveyed on their practice patterns and perceptions of role, objectivity, and dual agency in the disability evaluation process. Significant differences were found between forensic and nonforensic psychiatrists' perceptions of the dual-agency conflict, beliefs about who should perform evaluations, and beliefs about the weight given to different opinions when decisions of whether to award disability benefits are made. A minority of respondents in both groups reported having identified a patient as disabled, despite believing otherwise. The implications of these findings are discussed.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=21653261&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.jaapl.org/content/39/2/183.full.pdf+html
dc.subject*Disability Evaluation
dc.subject*Forensic Psychiatry
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectPhysician's Practice Patterns
dc.subjectQuestionnaires
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectMental and Social Health
dc.subjectPsychiatric and Mental Health
dc.subjectPsychiatry
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.titleEvaluating psychiatric disability: differences by forensic expertise
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleThe journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
dc.source.volume39
dc.source.issue2
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/psych_cmhsr/508
dc.identifier.contextkey2852782
html.description.abstract<p>The task of evaluating psychiatric disability poses several ethics-related and practical challenges for psychiatrists, especially when they are responding to a request from a third party for a disability evaluation on their own patient. This study sought to evaluate the differences in how forensic and nonforensic psychiatrists approach and view evaluations for Social Security disability benefits. Thirty-two forensic and 75 nonforensic psychiatrists were surveyed on their practice patterns and perceptions of role, objectivity, and dual agency in the disability evaluation process. Significant differences were found between forensic and nonforensic psychiatrists' perceptions of the dual-agency conflict, beliefs about who should perform evaluations, and beliefs about the weight given to different opinions when decisions of whether to award disability benefits are made. A minority of respondents in both groups reported having identified a patient as disabled, despite believing otherwise. The implications of these findings are discussed.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathpsych_cmhsr/508
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Psychiatry
dc.source.pages183-8


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record