Integrating risk and dangerousness in specific legal contexts: Clarifying concepts and justifying interventions.

Several legal interventions under the police power and parens patriae functions of the state depend partially on judgments that an individual is dangerous. Psychological research regarding risk assessment can provide relevant evidence regarding the appropriate application of these interventions. Developing, interpreting, and presenting relevant research regarding risk assessment in a manner that enhances the ability of courts to make accurate determinations of dangerousness requires clarification of the risk presented by this individual and explanation of how this person generates this risk. Testimony regarding such research can enhance the ability of the courts to make accurate judgments regarding the relationship between the risk presented and the justification for the specific intervention at issue. This article examines the justificatory functions of judgments of dangerousness for various police power and parens patriae interventions in order to clarify the manner in which psychological research and testimony can contribute to the ability of the courts to accurately assess the risk presented by an individual in making a judgment of dangerousness for a specific form of legal intervention.

Treating criminal offenders in correctional contexts: identifying interests and distributing responsibilities.

In Panetti v. Quarterman, three professional associations advocated commutation of capital sentences for offenders who are incompetent to face execution. Some judicial opinions deny that convicted offenders have any protected interest in avoiding a legally imposed sentence, and other opinions have found that the Eighth Amendment requires treatment for prisoners with serious mental health needs. This article examines some circumstances in which health care providers in the context of criminal punishment encounter apparent conflicts among the treatment interests of the individuals, the comprehensive interests of these individuals, legally protected interests, and the public interest. This analysis pursues clarification of these interests and of potential tensions among legal and professional obligations of health care providers. This article does not provide comprehensive resolution of this tension. Rather, it is intended to promote rigorous ongoing inquiry by clarifying the relevant interests at stake and the responsibilities of various participants in the complex interaction of health care and corrections.

Decision-making about volitional impairment in sexually violent predators.

The Kansas v. Hendricks (1997) decision, in which the Supreme Court authorized post-sentence civil commitment for certain sex offenders, appeared to be constitutionally legitimized by limiting the class of offenders eligible for this special form of civil commitment to those who are "unable to control" their dangerousness. Nowhere in the available record, however, did the Court elucidate what they meant by this notion of volitional impairment. This study sought to examine factors that legal professionals (n=43), psychologists (n=40), and mock jurors (n=76) deem most relevant to a determination of sex offender volitional impairment. Participants, who were randomly assigned to a sexual predator commitment or an insanity hearing context, read a series of 16 vignettes that described a pedophilic offender and included combinations of variables hypothesized to be related to judgments of volitional impairment. Results suggested that participants, who as a group made remarkably high estimates of likelihood of future sexual violence, considered verbalization of control, history of sexual violence, and the context of the hearing as highly relevant to determinations of volitional impairment. Implications for policy and practice are explored.

Involuntary treatment and competence to proceed in the criminal process: capital and noncapital cases.

Recent cases raise a series of questions regarding the involuntary administration of treatment intended to restore or maintain competence to proceed in the criminal process. As is often the case, these matters take on a special urgency in the context of capital punishment. The analysis presented in this paper suggests that the relevant interests that courts should consider in deciding whether to order the involuntary administration of treatment to restore or maintain competence converge to a greater degree than one might initially expect. When the applicable conception of medical interests is appropriately defined and the state's interest in protecting the integrity of the process is given appropriate weight, the legally protected state and individual interests converge to a substantial degree. Protecting both sets of interests may require a variety of procedures designed to avoid misguided interventions with the potential to undermine both sets of interests. Finally, this analysis provides an approach that allows the courts to grant appropriate weight to the professional ethics of those who perform evaluations and deliver treatment in these contexts.

Battered women who kill their abusers: an examination of commonsense notions, cognitions, and judgments.

It has been argued that battered women who kill their abusers represent a special class of defendants being unfairly treated in the legal system. As a result, commentators have argued for reforms to permit the judicial system to respond more fairly. Researchers have investigated the influences of these prescribed legal modifications and the possible influence of various demographic and psychological factors on legal reforms. However, social scientists have not yet asked some fundamental, psychological questions. Is the law consistent with what society believes is right and just? Is there a commonsense notion of justice in these cases? What factors constitute cognitive decision rules and influence judgments in cases of battered women who kill their abusers? This study uses a basic, psychological method to identify psychological factors that are important in judgments regarding battered women who kill and to better understand commonsense notions of justice in these cases.

The guilty mind and criminal sentencing: integrating legal and empirical inquiry as illustrated by capital sentencing.

We articulate an interpretation of mens rea that is broader than the traditional special sense but narrower than the traditional general sense. Mens rea in this intermediate sense addresses the guilty mind required by the sentencing criteria for specific criminal sentences for particular offenses. We advance an analytic structure for the integration of legal and empirical inquiry regarding standards of culpability that establish eligibility for capital punishment under contemporary United States legal doctrine. This structure addresses legal standards of culpability directly as well as indirectly in the form of evolving standards of decency. The general form of this analysis should be applicable more generally to sentencing provisions that address culpability as a sentencing consideration for other criminal sentences.

Outpatient civil commitment: a dangerous charade or a component of a comprehensive institution of civil commitment?

This article examines three criticisms frequently directed toward preventive commitment as one form of outpatient commitment. These criticisms contend that preventive commitment (a) abandons the dangerousness criteria for civil commitmnet, (b) promotes unwarranted inpatient commitment of those who do not meet civil commitment criteria, and (c) undermines important individual liberties by diluting the right to refuse treatment. Understanding and evaluating these criticisms requires analysis of the intersection among empirical, conceptual, and justificatory claims. According to the analysis presented here, advocates of preventive commitment can defend a legitimate role for preventive commitment. This analysis applies to preventive commitment as a dispositional alternative within a comprehensive institution of civil commitment involving distinct parens patriae and police power components.