PSY-510 Contemporary Issues in Ethics

Forensic Psychology is a specific specialty of discipline within the field of psychology; forensic psychology falls under the arena of criminal and legal system. Many people feel that the topic is largely a controversial issue while others feel the subject is very sensitive, however other within the legal system and criminal system. Many people in today’s society feel that punishment given to does who commit crimes of death should be sentenced to death regardless; of the accused state of mind when the crime was committed this is where psychology plays into the controversy. Potentially deciding one’s mental state and whether they live or die.This is what has made death penalties cases so very controversial in the U.S as well as many other judicial systems throughout the world.Many argue that capital punishment violates the human rights of the person sentenced to death. Others argue that from a societal perspective the offender violated the human rights of the victim(s) and therefore must be held accountable. The American legal system, reflecting public opinion, holds that the death penalty per se is not a human rights violation. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the death penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment (Gregg v. Georgia,1976), even while narrowing the applicability of the death penalty in certain situations (Atkins v. Virginia, 2002; Roper v. Simmons, 2005)” (GCU). The importance of understanding what is moral and properly being able to assist in assessing a defendants state of mind play a determining factor in legal proceedings, and psychologist must be not be bias, towards the death penalty or human rights surrounding death penalty cases because this could lead to violating ethics. There will always be controversy between societies beliefs about the rights of human regarding crimes that result in death. Psychologist accept a very daunting task which often further undermines what is considered reasonable punishment by the judicial or criminal legal system if any regarding a violent crimes.

”Even if one believes that the death penalty is a human rights violation, it does not necessarily follow that a psychologist involved in a capital case is defending or justifying that end result. A psychological assessment in which substantial psychopathology is found may divert defendants from the criminal justice process to a mental health system or may identify treatment needs in correctional settings. In addition, clinical psychologists who evaluate convicted defendants for mitigation in sentencing as well as sentenced defendants who may not be competent forexecution may be seen as helping to prevent human rights violations” (Ethics and Behavior, 2013). When determining if the accused is psychologically impaired a psychologist may often be called to assess and testify in a criminal proceeding regarding a defendant state of mind which in many cases ethics have been violated both by the criminal courts and the psychologist. Ethical implications arise often times because of the controversy surrounding death penalty cases. Some of these implications have resulted in cases being over turned which lead to misconduct on the justice system and psychologist. This has caused quite an issue resulting in many scholars questioning psychologist moral and ethical duties and proper training to deal with the task which result in forensic psychology. Whereas many psychologist have asked the question if a defendant guilt or innocence which should never be questioned or answered by the psychologist for this is the legal system duties and burden of proof.

            “Psychologists providing expert testimony based on psychological assessments with established relevance to the legal question at hand assist the courts in making fair determinations by illuminating data on the legal issue. However, neither justice nor the legal rights of plaintiffs or defendants are well served when psychologists declaring “expert” status present forensic opinions based on assessment instruments and techniques insufficient to substantiate. “In 2010, following intense controversy over the involvement of psychologists in military interrogations

at U.S. detention centers such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, the American

Psychological Association (APA) amended its Ethics Code Standard 1.02, Conflicts Between

Ethics and Law, Regulations or Other Governing Legal Authority” (Fisher, 2013). The amenr findings (Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility; Principle D: Justice; Standards 2.04, Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments, and 9.01, Bases for Assessments)” (GCU).

            When determining if the accused is psychologically impaired a psychologist may often be called to assess and testify in a criminal proceeding regarding the defendants state of mind which often times ethics are violated both by the court system and some psychologist.

Reference

Brodsky,S.L.Neal,T.M.&Jones,M.A.(2013).A reasonable Argument Against Banning PyschologistInvolovement in Death Penalty Cases:Ethics&Behavior,23(1).62:doi:1080110508422.757954

Ethics and Behavior 2013Fisher,C.B. Jan1,2013;23;p62-p66 Database: Sciences Citation Index

Fisher,C.B.(2013)Human rights and psychologist; involvement in assessment related to death penalty cases:Ethics&Behavior,23(1.).58-61.do:1080/10508422.2013.749761

http://gcu media.com/digital-resources