HOW/WHY THERAPEUTIC AND FORENSIC ROLES CANNOT BE RECONCILED

How/why therapeutic and forensic roles cannot be reconciled

Introduction

The dilemma between performing adequate forensic roles while also providing therapy has been debated for a long time in psychology, since the two are considered to be fairly incompatible with the other. Psychotherapists are usually of the opinion that would favor their clients while forensic experts stick to the facts that they are presented with through truthful and objective reporting and examining of evidence. Forensic experts must perform the role of presenting an unbiased report to the court and the jurors in order to bring justice to the victims or their relatives. The forensic-therapist dual relationships frequently present clash of interests, because of which unethical practices are carried out and must then be accounted for by authorities. Owing to the fact that several multiple relationships are built on the same factors of balance and fairness, the circumstance of psychotherapy eventually presents the circumstance of the correctness of the double role. In particular correctional as well as forensic settings, it would become the duty of clinicians or treating psychologists to perform the role of court appointed evaluators so that truthful and accurate testimonies are provided in the court.

Since psychotherapists must perform the role of being a patient advocate who provides guidance and appropriate treatments, there is hardly any similarity to the role of a forensic expert who must be vigilant and provide objective and evaluative reporting. In this paper, I will be evaluating the differing opinions that are presented in psychology about whether or not there can be any objectivity in being an honest forensic expert while also providing extensive psychotherapy and advocating personal care to clients.

Discussion

With the recent increase in crime rates, psychologists, psychotherapists and various mental health professionals have also been known to participate in providing forensic support where it is needed in the solving of crimes that may be related to their patients. While therapists may have avoided the world of judiciary for fear of threats or tightened insurance and other rules, they are now actively and willingly presenting as forensic expert witnesses in court mostly on behalf of their own patients, in order to achieve excellence in the forensic mental health professional market. More and more therapists are advocating psychotherapy treatments while being actively involved in the forensic side of their clients cases, and often this combination that may be considered incompatible by some works out fairly well for the clients since justice can be preserved. Therapists would know the psychological impact of the crime or accident that their client has been through hence would be able to view and evaluate the forensic evidence with a thorough knowledge of their background. According to Stuart A. Greenberg and Daniel Shuman, this conduct is not eliminated even through its supposed incompatibility because there is no understanding towards why ethical principles are formed and no solid reasoning towards why the forensic experts cannot provide an ethical manner in which to help experts find ...