FAST Puts Best Practices into Action
Key Differences Between Forensic Evaluators and Other Psychologists
Ethical Standards and Guidelines for Psychologists
All psychologists are encouraged to follow certain ethical standards and guidelines, such as those published by the American Psychological Association (APA). Psychologists who undertake assessment and treatment are known as clinical psychologists. All clinical psychologists complete a doctoral program that includes a year-long internship and, in some circumstances, continue on to receive postdoctoral training. But, in the same way you'd never expect a dermatologist to undertake heart surgery or a criminal defense attorney to represent someone in an intellectual property dispute, clinical psychologists also have specialized areas of practice, one of which is forensic evaluation.
A Specialized Role Requires Specialized Ethical Guidelines
Forensic evaluations guide legal decisions and, therefore, differ from mental health treatment and the assessments that are sometimes undertaken to guide treatment. The specialized focus of forensic evaluation means that forensic psychologists take care to align their practice with both the APA's ethical guidelines as well as additional guidance contained within the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology. These “Specialty Guidelines,” centered around core values of integrity, impartiality and fairness, and avoiding conflicts of interest, underscore the importance of a forensic evaluator’s unbiased judgment so that their evaluation results can properly assist the trier of fact.
The Forensic Psychologist's Role
Forensic psychologists play a unique role within the legal system, offering specialized assessments that substantially differ from services provided by non-forensic clinical psychologists. In most cases, an attorney or court hires a forensic psychologist to evaluate someone involved in legal proceedings. Results from this evaluation yield clinical information that guides legal decision-making, such as that made by a judge, a jury, or some other tribunal. Instead of the psychologist-patient relationship that many people associate with clinical psychologists who practice in non-forensic contexts, the attorney or court that hired the forensic psychologist takes on the role of the forensic psychologist's client, and the forensic psychologist refers to the person they evaluate as an examinee (or, in some circumstances, the terms "respondent," "plaintiff," "defendant," or "litigant" may be appropriate). Understanding these distinct roles and relationships allows professionals to effectively navigate the intersection of psychology and the legal system.
A Forensic Psychologist's Core Responsibilities: Integrity, Impartiality and Fairness, and Preventing Conflicts of Interest
Forensic psychological evaluations differ significantly from therapeutic work, as they require an objective, impartial assessment that responds to a specific legal question rather than focusing solely on a client's well-being. Whereas a treating psychologist is ethically bound to prioritize their client's best interests, a forensic psychologist is ethically bound to remain impartial, objective, and provide clinical data that helps answer a specific legal question. Common legal questions include, but are certainly not limited to, an examinee's competence to proceed, risk of engaging in certain conduct, or mental state at the time of an alleged criminal act. The forensic psychologist’s core responsibilities mean that, at times, a forensic evaluation may yield clinical information that is not necessarily favorable to an examinee's legal position. This possibility is why FAST evaluators discuss evaluation results with the retaining party before issuing written opinions.
Legal Relevance: A Key Concept
The concept of relevance offers a useful way to differentiate between forensic and other types of psychologists. When a forensic evaluator undertakes an evaluation, they strive to limit the contents of their evaluation to information that they view as relevant: that is, information about an examinee's functional abilities, capacities, knowledge, and beliefs that pertain to the legal issue at hand. FAST evaluators prioritize legally relevant information to avoid causing unnecessary harm that could come from disclosing irrelevant details. This practice aims to balance the forensic evaluator’s obligation to provide relevant clinical information to legal decision-makers with their duty to protect the rights and well-being of the examinee. By adhering to this carefully-calibrated approach, FAST evaluators uphold respect for the examinee while promoting fairness and integrity within the legal process.