Forensic Psychology For Dummies (154 page)

Often some explicit or implicit support from friends or schoolmates is present for the idea of the attack, if not for the actual shootings. So the power of the peer group in influencing youngsters is present here as in delinquent behaviour that I discuss earlier in this section.

Although no characteristic ‘profile’ for the typical school shooter exists, because they differ from each other in many ways, many of the perpetrators have experienced bullying and harassment.

If they can be spotted and interpreted, early warning signs are often present that the individual is in need of help. This can be talk of suicide or general anger, as described for violent offenders in Chapter 14.

Part VI

The Part of Tens

In this part . . .

Forensic psychology is a professional activity, constrained by legal and ethical boundaries. The activity itself is carried out by people who go through many years of training. This part gives some examples of the stages in becoming a forensic psychologist and the principles that its practitioners are bound by. Examples of cases that illustrate some of the matters that I discuss earlier in this book are also given, as well as indications of the emerging areas that forensic psychologists are moving into. This part draws heavily in my own experiences over the last quarter of a century training forensic psychologists and providing consultancy in many different legal situations.

Chapter 17

Ten Professional Requirements for Forensic Psychologists

In This Chapter

Putting the legal demands of the court first

Remaining unfazed by external pressures

Maintaining professional standards

Forensic psychologists in fiction are often portrayed as gung-ho characters who totally ignore the ethical and legal constraints of the profession – no doubt the everyday realities are likely to slow the story down. But if you employ or have to challenge a forensic psychologist, you need to make sure that they’re following the rules and not stepping outside their professional remit. Or, if you’re an aspiring forensic psychologist, you need to be aware of the scope and boundaries of professional practice. In this chapter, I look at some central rules and principles guiding the work of forensic psychologists.

Providing Evidence for the Court, Not the Client

You may think that he who pays the piper calls the tune, and that if you’re hiring a forensic psychologist as an expert then he is accountable to you. But as with many aspects of the legal world, the one who foots the bill doesn’t necessarily have control over the proceedings.

In the UK, a defendant can pay for an expert out of his own pocket or from legal aid – the expert can also be employed by The Crown (the State) or in civil cases, by the plaintiff.

In such cases, the legal requirement is that the expert is a neutral advisor to the court and not a servant of whoever’s paying the bill.

Contrary to what you see in TV courtroom dramas and films, and from reports of legal cases, the expert is there to serve the court, even though attorneys may try their utmost to make sure that the expert gives the necessary evidence to support their case.

This has a curious result that I have experienced in a number of cases I have advised on, and colleagues have reported similar events. The attorneys will ask for a report for which (eventually) I will get paid, but then it will not be presented in court because the attorney does not think it will help his client. I am doing my job of producing a report for the court. But the attorney does not want the judges or jury to see my report so I am thanked for my services. What I have written is quietly filed away.

Getting Ethical Approval for Research

Before starting on a piece of research, the forensic psychologist writes a research proposal. Most Western countries require any research proposals for any discipline to be vetted by
ethical committees
, but particularly if the research deals with people or animals. These committees are made up of people experienced in the type of research, but who are often also members of the public or representatives of client groups.

Ethical committees have many areas of concern, including the need to obtain:

Informed consent:
Making sure that anyone taking part in the research knows the purpose of the research and how it affects them. Whenever you take part in a study, you’re asked to sign a consent form to show that you fully understand and agree with the objectives of the research.

Privacy:
Making sure that the results of the study and the records kept of what people say or do have suitable levels of confidentiality and anonymity. Ensuring privacy is so that people’s responses can never be used for purposes other than the research, and that people can’t be embarrassed or otherwise discomforted by what they said or did in the research process. Maintaining privacy includes destroying the records of the raw information collected when the research is over.

Safety:
Making sure that no one is physically or psychologically hurt or abused during the research.

Following Codes of Practice

Members of a professional body usually work within a well-established code of practice (rules) of the organisation. Codes of practice can be comprehensive and detailed. For example, the codes of practice of the American Psychological Association form a substantial tome. Other professional bodies around the world have similar though less extensive lists of dos and don’ts (usually more don’ts than dos).

Codes of practice relate to a wide range of matters, from the need to declare ‘conflicts of interest’ – for example, a commercial interest in the results of an experiment – to avoiding compromising relationships with clients (even though fictional forensic psychologists can’t seem to help falling in love with suspects!). Keeping up-to-date with developments in the relevant subject areas, called
continuing professional development
(CPD), is a requirement that is usually included.

Avoiding the Ultimate Question

I talk about what the court expects of the experts in the section ‘Providing Evidence for the Court, not the Client’. But experts also have to bear in mind a crucial issue that may be a little surprising – being careful not to steal the court’s thunder. Stating an opinion can be particularly problematic for forensic psychologists because their evidence isn’t usually the hard evidence that, for example, forensic scientists may offer.

Forensic psychologists are commenting directly on the character of the accused, the mental state of the defendant or the reliability of testimony, or other aspects of the person involved. Therefore, they’re dealing directly with the opinions that the judge or jury form of the defendant.