Secondary traumatic stress, burnout, compassion satisfaction, and perceived organizational trauma readiness in forensic science professionals.

Secondary traumatic stress, burnout, and compassion satisfaction have been described since the 1980s and extensively studied in first responders, law enforcement, legal professionals, and human service providers. There are few studies in forensic science professionals. To determine levels of secondary traumatic stress, burnout, and compassion satisfaction and relate these to demographics and job characteristics, we administered online a modified version of the Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL) questionnaire to professionals in crime laboratories and medical examiner offices. Participants also completed a modified version of the Vicarious Trauma-Organizational Readiness Guide (VT-ORG) to measure perceptions of their organizations' efforts to address vicarious trauma and promote health and wellness. Results from 419 subjects indicated that field-based forensic science professionals registered higher levels of secondary traumatic stress compared to laboratory-based professionals, but burnout and compassion satisfaction were not significantly different between these groups. Demographic variables did not predict any of these outcome measures, but work with victims' families and testifying significantly, albeit weakly, predicted higher secondary traumatic stress. Greater employee belief that their organizations were addressing issues of stress and trauma predicted lower levels of secondary traumatic stress and burnout and higher levels of compassion satisfaction. Write-in responses by participants paralleled the quantitative findings. These results indicate a need to strengthen organizational efforts to address stress and trauma and promote health and wellness, particularly in professionals with direct field-based exposure to crime scenes, contact with victims' families, and responsibility for testifying.

DSM-5 and posttraumatic stress disorder.

The latest iteration of the posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) criteria presented in The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) includes specific elaborations of the gatekeeper criteria, a new category of stressor, an expansion in the number of symptoms, addition of a new subtype of PTSD, and an enlarged text discussion that breaks new ground in defining the criteria. We first trace the rationale underlying these changes and their impact on the prevalence of PTSD diagnoses in clinical studies and then present potential implications of the new criteria for forensic assessment methodology and the detection of malingering, interpretations of criminal responsibility and mitigation, evaluation of the reliability of witnesses, the scope of claims in civil and employment cases, and eligibility for disability.

Secondary traumatic stress in attorneys and their administrative support staff working with trauma-exposed clients.

Although secondary trauma has been assessed in various groups of mental health professionals, few studies, to date, have examined secondary trauma among attorneys exposed to clients' traumatic experiences. This study examined indicators of secondary trauma among attorneys (N = 238) and their administrative support staff (N = 109) in the Wisconsin State Public Defender Office. Attorney participants demonstrated significantly higher levels of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, depression, secondary traumatic stress, burnout, and functional impairment compared with the administrative support staff. This difference was mediated by attorneys' longer work hours and greater contact with clients who had experienced or had been directly involved with trauma. Sex, age, years on the job, office size, and personal history of trauma did not predict symptoms. These findings suggest a need to support attorneys experiencing these symptoms and to address high workloads as well as the intensity of contact with trauma-exposed clients.

POWs versus torturers: forensic evaluation of military personnel.

In April 2002, 17 American prisoners of war (POWs) and 37 of their family members brought an action in federal district court in Washington, D.C., against the Republic of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and the Iraqi Intelligence Service for torture the POWs alleged they endured in 1991, following their capture during Operation Desert Storm. This action was the first in which prisoners of war sued a sovereign state for torture. As part of their case, the plaintiffs claimed psychological damage, and presented forensic evaluations of the POWs and their families in support. This article will address the novel questions and problems in this case, including: the legal context of the action; the logistical difficulties in evaluating a large number of plaintiffs in diverse locations; the challenges of establishing psychological injury in military personnel; the relationship between the forensic findings and the literature on POWs; the potential bias and secondary trauma experienced by the examiners; and the outcome of the action and prospects for similar actions in the future.