Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
  • Log out
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
OtherJOURNAL ARTICLE

The mental state at the time of the offense measure: its validation and admissibility under Daubert

R Rogers and DW Shuman
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online March 2000, 28 (1) 23-28;
R Rogers
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DW Shuman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

Melton et al. (Melton GB, Petrila J, Poythress NG, Slobogin C: Psychological Evaluations for the Courts (ed 2). New York: Guilford, 1997) recently advocated the use of the Mental State at the Time of the Offense (MSE-Offense) measure not only as a screen for insanity evaluations but also as the sole measure in "obvious" cases of insanity. Given this recommendation for expanding the role of the MSE-Offense, the current authors have evaluated the available data based on its construction and validation. We found fundamental flaws in its development and grave shortcomings in its validation. Based on these limitations, we conclude that the MSE-Offense is unacceptable under the Daubert standard (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., U.S. 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993)) for either the screening or determination of criminal responsibility.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 28 (1)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 28, Issue 1
1 Mar 2000
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The mental state at the time of the offense measure: its validation and admissibility under Daubert
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The mental state at the time of the offense measure: its validation and admissibility under Daubert
R Rogers, DW Shuman
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Mar 2000, 28 (1) 23-28;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The mental state at the time of the offense measure: its validation and admissibility under Daubert
R Rogers, DW Shuman
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Mar 2000, 28 (1) 23-28;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Ethics questions raised by the neuropsychiatric, neuropsychological, educational, developmental, and family characteristics of 18 juveniles awaiting execution in Texas
  • Missouri overrules the United States Supreme Court on capital punishment for minors
  • Thirty-five years of working with civil commitment statutes
Show more JOURNAL ARTICLE

Similar Articles

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2023 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law