Abstract
Assessment of competency for execution presents two compelling ethical questions for mental health professionals: whether clinicians can ethically provide such assessment and, if so, how it should be done in order to maximize quality and minimize ethical conflict. In this article we address the issue of whether to participate and, if so, how. The question of whether to participate is discussed by summarizing the arguments for and against participation and offering guidelines for making a decision. The question of how to proceed is discussed in two contexts: preadiudication (before a formal decision about competency) and postadjudication'(following a determination of “incompetent” and transfer of the offender to another facilitv for treatment and further assessment). Finally, recommendations are made regarding research that would improve the quality of execution competency assessments.
Footnotes
-
Some of the ideas contained in this article were developed as part of a symposium, entitled “The Assessment of Competency for Execution: Ethical and Technical Issues,” presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., August, 1986. A later version of this paper was presented at the 18th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, October 1987. The authors wish to thank Lany Annis, John Dale, Lynn Hatcher, Patricia Griffin Heilbrun, Mary Dell McClaren, and Ken Snover for their help in the preparation of this article. They are also grateful for the support received from the administration and staff of the Forensic Service, Florida State Hospital, and Corrections Mental Health Institution. This article does not represent an official position of either the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services or the Florida Department of Corrections.
- Copyright © 1988, The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
