Use the section entitled, "Knowingly Allowing Bias to Control Testimony," on pages 384-385 from the following article, Reid, W. H. (2002). Law and psychiatry: Ethics and forensic work. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 8, 380-385.
Answer the following questions:
1) What is your reaction to the two cases presented? Could you work objectively in these cases?
2) Do you think there are situations where it would be best to decline working because you would be unable to remain objective?
Welcome to BM! Please rate 5/5 for my 500 words of brainstorming. Your business is valuable to me! Thank you so much for using BrainMass.com!
1)What is your reaction to the two cases presented? Could you work objectively in these cases?
In the first case, I was shocked that the professional wavered his stance. I feel that it is our duty to remain steadfast in our positions, not exude a "wishy washy" sense as he did after he initially acknowledged that the defendant was severely mentally ill at the time of the killings, but then later expressed that the defendant knew the legal wrongfulness, and consequences of the acts. This admission definitely casts doubt on his professional judgment and reputation since he claimed to be influenced by the applicable state statute. ...
Personal reactions are briefly integrated to respond to an article about "Knowingly Allowing Bias to Control Testimony."