RESUMEN
Immigrants are more likely to experience mental health symptoms due to the trauma and persecution they often experience before arrival, and the stress of migration. In addition, as immigration policies have become more restricted in the United States, larger numbers of immigrants are facing deportation, proceedings, and/or detention. This has increased the demand for psychologists who are needed to conduct forensic psychological evaluations in immigration courts. Psychologists can aid immigration courts in a number of ways, including by providing evidence of trauma in asylum seekers or in victims of human trafficking, or by assessing competency to participate in immigration proceedings, or risk for violence. Through a case sample, this paper highlights special considerations when conducting cross-cultural forensic assessments in immigration court and illustrates some ways in which clinical psychologists can apply their knowledge to immigration proceedings by developing expertise in the areas of multicultural psychology and forensic assessment.
Asunto(s)
Asistencia Sanitaria Culturalmente Competente , Emigrantes e Inmigrantes , Emigración e Inmigración/legislación & jurisprudencia , Psicología Forense , Trastornos Mentales/diagnóstico , Psicología Clínica , Refugiados , Adulto , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Research to date has not adequately demonstrated whether the HCR-20 Violence Risk Assessment Scheme (HCR-20; Webster, Douglas, Eaves, & Hart, 1997), a structured violence risk assessment measure with a robust literature supporting its validity in male samples, is a valid indicator of violence risk in women. This study utilized data from the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence to retrospectively score an abbreviated version of HCR-20 in 827 civil psychiatric patients. HCR-20 scores and predictive accuracy of community violence were compared for men and women. Results suggested that the HCR-20 is slightly, but not significantly, better for evaluating future risk for violence in men than in women, although the magnitude of the gender differences was small and was largely limited to historical factors. The results do not indicate that the HCR-20 needs to be tailored for use in women or that it should not be used in women, but they do highlight that the HCR-20 should be used cautiously and with full awareness of its potential limitations in women.
Asunto(s)
Psiquiatría Forense , Violencia/psicología , Adolescente , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Factores de Riesgo , Violencia/estadística & datos numéricos , MujeresRESUMEN
Clinicians have observed that psychiatric patients with correctional histories evidence attitudes and behaviors that seem adaptive in penal environments but are maladaptive in mental health settings. This study sought to assess the reliability and concurrent validity of a rating scale designed to measure correctional adaptation using a sample of 64 patients from a state psychiatric hospital. Scale ratings were obtained through structured interviews, whereas predictor variables were gleaned from chart review and self-report. The scale demonstrated good interrater reliability (ICC = .83) and acceptable internal consistency (alpha= .67). Of the variables evaluated, two were significantly correlated with Structured Assessment of Correctional Adaptation (SACA) total scores, total months sentenced to prison or jail (r = .26), and frequency of disciplinary tickets while in prison or jail (r = .31). Stepwise regression analyses revealed only the latter variable significantly predicted SACA score (R = .31), F(1, 58) = 6.27, p < .05. Clinical implications of these findings, the scale, and the construct of correctional adaptation are discussed.