|
|
| Research article summary (published 30 Jul 2005): |
Independent and court-ordered forensic neuropsychological examinations: official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology.
Full Abstract
Independent forensic neuropsychological examinations are performed by neuropsychologists who are hired as independent contractors by third parties to make determinations regarding neuropsychological functioning. The responsibilities of neuropsychologists when performing independent or court-ordered forensic examinations differ from those of clinical examinations. Because neuropsychological training typically occurs in clinical contexts, the transition to forensic contexts may result in uncertainty about how to negotiate the unique responsibilities of the forensic examiner role. Neuropsychologists are responsible for maintaining the highest standards of professional practice when performing independent and court-ordered forensic examinations. To reach and maintain the highest standards of practice, neuropsychologists must understand the unique relationships with retaining parties and examinees and strive to maintain true independence and objectivity. Although a true neuropsychologist-patient relationship is not considered to exist within the context of a forensic neuropsychological evaluation, neuropsychologists have ethical responsibilities to both the retaining party and the examinee.
Author information
Author/s: Bush, Shane S (SS); NAN Policy & Planning Committee;
Affiliation: 496 Smithtown Bypass, Ste. 304, Smithtown, NY 11787, USA. sbushphdnp(-atsign-)medscape.com
Journal and publication information
Publication Type: Journal Article; Practice Guideline
Journal: Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists (Arch Clin Neuropsychol), published in United States. (Language: eng)
Reference: 2005-Dec; vol 20 (issue 8) : pp 997-1007
Dates: Created 2005/11/22; Completed 2006/02/28;
PMID: 16076547, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 2/18/2009, IMS Date: )
Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.
External Links for this article
(including full text providers, if available):
Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.
This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.
MeSH headings (categories)
This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.
Related articles
These are the highest related articles currently in the database:
- [Tasks of improving forensic medical expertise in presenting material evidence]
30 Mar 1985 - [Standardization of the documentation utilized in conducting forensic medical expertise on material evidence]
30 Dec 1989 - [Shortcomings of reports of forensic medicine experts with regard to the professional malpractice of medical workers]
30 Dec 1984 - Expert witnesses.
27 Mar 2003 - Expert witnesses.
27 Mar 2003 - [The tasks for further improving the appointment process and the level of performance of forensic medical expertise]
29 Jun 1989 - [The main results and objectives of further improving the activities of the laboratories of the medico-legal expertise bureaus]
30 Mar 1986 - [Guidelines for the scientific and professional development of forensic neuropsychology]
29 Jun 2004 - [Effects of the expression of the expert opinion on prosecution]
30 Oct 2000 - Requiem for the "general acceptance" standard in forensic science.
30 Dec 1981
Related Article Map
Legend:
- FREE Full text Article.
- Abstract only.
- Title only. More help.
See a large map of 100+ related articles.