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

Search

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

Letters

Geoffrey Neimark and Matthew Hurford
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online March 2013, 41 (1) 157;
Geoffrey Neimark
Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew Hurford
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Editor:

Obtaining collateral information is an integral component of the psychiatric assessment. Current American Psychiatric Association (APA) guidelines recommend acquiring such information, particularly in cases in which “patients have impaired insight, including when patients have substance use disorders.”1 The Internet may serve as an important source of collateral information.2 One readily available resource that can influence treatment planning is patients' criminal case records, which are publicly available online in many states and can be easily accessed by clinicians.

Accessing patients' criminal records via the Internet can provide clinically significant information. Such sites may provide details relevant to clinical concerns, ranging from prescribing controlled substances, to uncovering a history of drug-related crimes in patients with substance abuse disorders, to performing a more comprehensive risk of violence assessments on patients found to have histories of assaults or other violent crimes.

The ethics of using the Internet to search for patient information has been explored by other authors,3 and important questions remain, including the optimal manner in which such information ought to be integrated into the clinical encounter: should patients be told about the results of searches performed on them? Should the results of a search be documented in the clinical record? Furthermore, psychodynamic factors informing such searches, including voyeurism, should be considered, and clinicians should be mindful of countertransferential enactments—namely, assuming the role of detective as opposed to that of psychiatrist. The aforementioned complexities inherent in performing such searches should not, however, prevent psychiatrists from using potentially important data.

Historical information about patients has traditionally been obtained primarily through the psychiatric interview. However, patients, for various reasons, may be reluctant or unwilling to provide data about their criminal history that nonetheless may be of vital importance to treatment planning and risk assessment. Online state legal records provide an easily accessible and readily available adjunctive source of information that may prove useful in the management of such patients.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures of financial or other potential conflicts of interest: None.

  • © 2013 American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

References

  1. 1.↵
    American Psychiatric Association: Practice Guideline for the Psychiatric Evaluation of Adults (ed 2). Washington, DC: APA, 2006. Available at http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/content/aspx?bookid=28&sectionid=2021783. Accessed January 23, 2013
  2. 2.↵
    1. Neimark G,
    2. Hurford MO,
    3. DiGiacomo J
    : The Internet as collateral informant. Am J Psychiatry 163:1842, 2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Clinton BK,
    2. Silverman BC,
    3. Brendel DH
    : Patient-targeted Googling: the ethics of searching online for patient information. Harv Rev Psychiatry 18:103–12, 2010
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 41 (1)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 41, Issue 1
1 Mar 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
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.
Letters
(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
Letters
Geoffrey Neimark, Matthew Hurford
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Mar 2013, 41 (1) 157;

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
Letters
Geoffrey Neimark, Matthew Hurford
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Mar 2013, 41 (1) 157;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Editor:
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Letters
  • Letters
  • Letters
Show more Letters

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 © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law