Sexual predator evaluations and phrenology: considering issues of evidentiary reliability.
This article reviews six assessment procedures used for assessing the recidivism risk of previously convicted sexual offenders. The review of these procedures examines whether they comply with generally accepted ethical and practice standards. With few exceptions, most risk assessment instruments fail to comply with these standards. Currently used instruments for risk assessment continue to rely excessively on clinical judgment; and, as a result, they remain at a preliminary stage of development. Consequently, these instruments amount to experimental procedures; and, therefore, they cannot support expert testimony in a legal proceeding.
Campbell
T W
TW
4105 Metro Parkway, Ste 103, Sterling Heights, MI 48310, USA. terence.campbell3@gte.net
D003415:Crime / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D004995:Ethics, Professional; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D010378:Pedophilia / Q000175:diagnosis; D011581:Psychological Tests / Q000592:standards*; D011584:Psychology / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012008:Recurrence; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012742:Sex Offenses / Q000517:prevention & control / Q000523:psychology*