Home » Society Crime » Sex Offenses Crime » Crime Statistics and Research » Research Studypsychopaths Research Studypsychopaths in Crimes Prevention & Resource Directory

In a recent civil commitment hearing in the United States the District Attorneys Office decided not to introduce a psychologists testimony concerning her PCLR assessment, because of the belief that she was not qualified to use the instrument. The grounds for this belief are not clear, but apparently included some concerns raised by the Public Defenders Office about the adequacy of the psychologists training in the use of the PCLR. The implication seemed to be that in order for clinicians to be qualified to use the PCLR they must have participated in the training program offered by my organization, Darkstone Research Group.This particular case is similar to many others in which I am asked to evaluate a clinicians qualifications and competence with respect to the PCLR assessment of psychopathy. However, in all but the most egregious cases I would be on shaky grounds if I did so. I have no professional or legal authority to determine who can and cannot use the PCLR, or to provide judgments about the adequacy of specific clinicians and their assessments. In North America the education, professional training, and clinicalforensic experience required to purchase and use psychological instruments, including the PCLR and its derivatives, the Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version PCL: SV and the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version PCL: YV, are determined by the test publishers, professional standards e.g., the American Psychological Associations Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, and by state U.S.A. or provincial Canada licensing or regulatory boards. As long as clinicians meet relevant professional and regulatory standards, have sufficient forensic experience, are legally permitted to conduct psychological assessments, and are familiar with the clinical and research literature on psychopathy, they would meet the technical requirements for use of the PCLR.Beyond this, it is the responsibility of clinicians to do what they can to ensure that they have the appropriate level of training and experience for the purpose at hand, and that they adhere to the appropriate professional and ethical guidelines and standards. They also should be familiar with the relevant research literature and be prepared to have their assessments subjected to scrutiny and examination. Many clinicians feel more comfortable if they have received or been exposed to specialized training in the use of a particular instrument. This may be especially true with respect to the PCLR. As indicated in the PCLR Manual, such training can be provided within institutions by individuals who are themselves experienced in the administration, scoring, and interpretation of the PCLR. The Manual also recommends that a clinician should complete five to ten practice assessments and achieve an acceptable level of interrater reliability before using the PCLR for forensic purposes. Some institutions have set their own standards for inhouse PCLR training, and most of the clinicians who participate in this training should have little difficulty in conducting reliable PCLR assessments.In large part, the issue of qualifications necessary to use the PCLR is the result of the prominent role it plays in assessments of risk for violence and suitability for treatment, and because such assessments potentially have serious implications for both the individual concerned and for the public. PCLR evaluations therefore are subjected to scrutiny by prosecutors and defense counsel that is more intense than it is with most other psychological instruments. This is particularly so with respect to the increasing use of the PCLR in civil commitment proceedings in the United States, dangerous offender hearings in Canada, and severe dangerous personality disorder evaluations in the United Kingdom. In discussing its use in sexual predator evaluations, for example, Campbell 2000 commented, Though it is more an objective procedure than not, there are elements of clinical judgment involved in using the PCLR. Consequently, appropriate usage of the PCLR appears to require specific training p. 125. He went on to say that psychologists who use the PCLR as part of a risk assessment tool are at risk for violating the American Psychological Associations 1992 ethical standards associated with boundaries of competence if they have not had specific PCLR training

 

Address: 2136 West Mall Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4
Website: http://www.hare.org/