FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY

Forensic Psychology

Forensic Psychology.

1. Introduction

In our experience writings on ethical issues in the correctional and forensic domains tend to be preoccupied with matters such as dual relationships, conflicts of interest, informed consent, duty to warn, confidentiality, and risk assessment ([Bush et al., 2006], [Haag, 2006] and [Vess, 2009-this issue]). A common thread running through all these ethical dilemmas is arguably a concern with victims' rights and/or community protection and the role of punishment. While the potential of offenders to harm their fellow citizens is of utmost importance to correctional practitioners, there is also the matter of offenders' entitlements and rights to consider as well. It is all too easy to slide from an understandable desire to punish or hold offenders accountable for their crimes to a failure to acknowledge their legitimate moral standing within the community. Duff (2001) has powerfully argued that the flipside of holding people accountable for the violation of warranted norms is acknowledgement of their status as fellow members of the community who deserve to be treated with respect and their inherent dignity recognized. The upshot of such recognition respect is that offenders should not be subject to unreasonable sanctions, humiliating treatment, overly harsh prison or parole conditions, or permanent exclusion from the community. In other words, offenders are rights holders as well as rights violators and their claims for fair and humane treatment ought to be accepted (Ward & Birgden, 2007).

The implication of adopting a much broader ethical perspective within the forensic and correctional practice domains is that assumptions underpinning practices such as punishment, rehabilitation, and more broadly, social justice, become matters of ethical concern. Arguably, if offenders are systematically excluded from social goods such as employment, adequate medical services, education, social interaction, and political involvement it is hard to see in what sense they can be held accountable by their community. In such a scenario, they have obligations but no entitlements and therefore could reasonably reply to the courts that their lack of equal standing and consideration from the state and community means any obligations are forfeit. Irrespective of the strengths of such a claim it is clear to us that there are weighty ethical matters confronting correctional and forensic practitioners that have been neglected.

Our aim in the special issue is to address some of the more abstract and fundamental ethical problems evident in the criminal justice system and to inquire into their significance for those individuals who assess and deliver rehabilitation programs to offenders. It seems to us that the primary ethical challenges revolve around two core themes: (a) ethical boundaries between offenders and the rest of the community, and (b) the distinction between punishment and rehabilitation practices. The two themes are interrelated in that the justification for punishments and its components to some degree depend on whether offenders are included within the moral community or excluded and primarily regarded as threats to be managed. The five papers comprising the special issue address these themes in various ways and in our view effectively redraw the ...