Психометрические методики зарубежной судебно-психиатрической практики и их теоретическая основа

Полный текст:
Читать

Рекомендуемое оформление библиографической ссылки:

Харитонова Н.К., Русаковская О.А. Психометрические методики зарубежной судебно-психиатрической практики и их теоретическая основа // Российский психиатрический журнал. 2018. №5. С. 64-73.

Аннотация

В научном обзоре с целью обсуждения перспективы применения дименсионального подхода в отечественной судебной психиатрии рассматриваются методики судебно-психиатрического исследования, применяемые за рубежом. Описано понятие capacity, не имеющее аналогов в российской экспертологии, которое в рамках различных предметных видов экспертизы операционализируется через конкретные юридически значимые способности испытуемого, что даёт возможность разрабатывать и применять психометрические методы судебно-психиатрического исследования. Обсуждаются преимущества и ограничения дименсионального подхода в судебно-психиатрической практике.


Ключевые слова экспертологические понятия; юридически значимые способности; методы судебно психиатрического исследования; недееспособность; ограничение дееспособности

Литература

1. Makushkin EV. Diagnoz i ego struktura: klinicheskie, ehkspertnye, pravovye i social'nye konstrukty. In: Sudebno-psihiatricheskaya diagnostika. Eds Makushkin EV, Tkachenko AA. Moscow; 2017. p. 13–33. Russian. 2. Tkachenko AA. Sovremennye klassifikacii i metodologiya sudebno-psihiatricheskogo diagnoz. In: Sudebnaya psikhiatriya. Aktual'nye problem. Ed. VV Vandysha. Moscow; 2018. p. 175–204. Russian. 3. Funkcional'nyj diagnoz v sudebnoj psihiatrii. Monografiya. Eds TB Dmitrieva, BV Shostakovich. Moscow; 2001. 196 p. Russian. 4. Grisso T, Borum R, Edens J, et al. Evaluating Competencies. Boston, MA: Springer Science Business Media, Inc.; 2003. 553 p. 5. Marson D, Ingram K. Competency to consent to research: A growing field of research. Journal of Ethics, Law, and Aging. 1996;(2):59–63. 6. Safuanov FS, Kharitonova NK, Zeyger MV, et al. [Complex forensic psychiatric examination of cases concerning restriction of legal capacity due to mental disorder: challenges and prospects]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2016;(2):37–43. Russian. 7. Grisso T. Competence To Stand Trial Evaluations. Sarasota, Fla.: Professional Ressource Press; 2014. 162 p. 8. Laboratory of community psychiatry, Competency to stand trial and mental illness. Rockville, Md.: U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute of Mental Health; 1977. 9. Heilbrun K. Principles of forensic mental health assessment. N.Y.: Springer; 2014. 335 p. 10. Melton G, Petrila J, Poythress N, et al. Psychological evaluations for the courts. New York: Guilford; 1997. 949 p. 11. Bonnie R. The competence of criminal defendants: A theoretical reformulation. Behav Sci Law. 1992;10(3):291–316. DOI: 10.1002/bsl.2370100303 12. Moye J, Marson D. Assessment of decision-making capacity in older adults: an emerging area of practice and research. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2007;62(1):3–11. DOI: 10.1093/geronb/62.1.p3 13. Marson D, Sawrie S, Snyder S, et al. Assessing financial capacity in patients with Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2000;57(6):877–84. DOI: 10.1001/archneur.57.6.877 14. Kharitonova NK, Rusakovskaya OA, Koroleva EV, et al. Problema ogranichennoy deesposobnosti v Rossii i za rubezhom. Analiticheskiy obzor. Moscow; 2016. 96 p. Russian. 15. Kharitonova NK, Rusakovskaya OA. [Methodological approaches to capacity assessment in the foreign practice and research: review]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2016;(5):33–43. Russian. 16. Loeb P. Independent Living Scales (ILS) Manual. San Antonio: Psychological Corp; 1996. 112 p. 17. Lawton M, Moss M, Fulcomer M, et al. A Research and Service Oriented Multilevel Assessment Instrument. J Gerontol. 1982;37(1):91–9. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/37.1.91 18. Anderer SJ. A Model for Determining Competency in Guardianship Proceedings. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter. 1990;14(2):107–14. 19. McGaw S, Sturmey P. Assessing parents with learning disabilities: The parental skills model. Child Abuse Review. 1994;3(1):36–51. DOI: 10.1002/car.2380030107 20. Guion R. Standards for psychological measurement. In: The Professional Psychologist's Handbook. Ed. Sales B. Boston, MA: Springer US; 1983. p. 111–40. 21. Guion R. Assessment, measurement, and prediction for personnel decisions. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis; 2011. 650 p. 22. Appelbaum P. Competency to Consent to Research. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1982;39(8):951–8. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1982.04290080061009 23. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS. MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T). Sarasota, FL: Professional resource Press; 1998. 24. The MacCAT-T: a clinical tool to assess patients' capacities to make treatment decisions. Psychiatric Services. 1997;48(11):1415–9. DOI: 10.1176/ps.48.11.1415 25. Heber R. A manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. Springfield, Ill.: American Association on Mental Deficiency, 1959. 26. Katz S, Ford A, Moskowitz R, et al. Studies of illness in the aged. The index of ado: A standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1963;185:914–9. 27. Wolinsky F, Johnson R. The Use of Health Services by Older Adults. J Gerontol. 1991;46(6):345–57. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/46.6.s345 28. Gurland B, Maurer M. Life and Works of Sidney Katz, MD: A Life Marked by Fundamental Discovery. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012;13(9):764–5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2012.09.003 29. Porter E. A phenomenological alternative to the ADL research tradition. Journal of Aging and health. 1995;7(1):22–45. 30. Pierce PS. Adult Functional Adaptive Behavior Scale: Manual of Directions. 1989. 31. Loewenstein D, Amigo E, Duara R, et al. A New Scale for the Assessment of Functional Status in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders. Journal of Gerontology. 1989;44(4):114–21. 32. Fillenbaum G. Multidimensional Functional Assessment of Older Adults. New York: Psychology Press; 1989. 192 p. 33. Fillenbaum G, Smyer M. The Development, Validity, and Reliability of the Oars Multidimensional Functional Assessment Questionnaire. J Gerontol. 1981;36(4):428–34. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/36.4.428 34. Marson DC, Martin RC, Wadley V, et al. Clinical Interview Assessment of Financial Capacity in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2009;57(5):806–14. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02202.x. 35. Edelstein B., Nygren M., Northrop L. et al. Assessment of capacity to make financial and medical decisions.Paper presented at 101st Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Aug. 20–24. 1993. 36. Edelstein B. Challenges in the assessment of decision-making capacity. J Aging Stud. 2000;14(4):423–37. DOI: 10.1016/s0890-4065(00)80006-7 37. Moye J, Marson DC, Edelstein B. Assessment of Capacity in an Aging Society. The American psychologist. 2013;68(3):158–71. DOI: 10.1037/a0032159 38. Lichtenberg P, Stoltman J, Ficker L, et al. A Person-Centered Approach to Financial Capacity Assessment: Preliminary Development of a New Rating Scale. Clin Gerontol. 2015;38(1):49–67. DOI: 10.1080/07317115.2014.970318 39. Lichtenberg P, Ficker L, Rahman-Filipiak A, et al. The Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale (LFDSS): A new tool for assessing financial decision making and preventing financial exploitation. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2016;28(3):134–51. DOI: 10.1080/08946566.2016.1168333 40. Lichtenberg P, Gross E, Ficker L. Quantifying Risk of Financial Incapacity and Financial Exploitation in Community-dwelling Older Adults: Utility of a Scoring System for the Lichtenberg Financial Decision-making Rating Scale. Clin Gerontol. 2018;(8):1–15. DOI: 10.1080/07317115.2018.1485812 41. Achenbach TM. Integrative guide for the 1991 CBCL/4–18, YSR and TRF profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Dept of Psychiatry; 1995. 211 p. 42. Deutsch RM, Suri S. Concordance of parent perception of their children’s behavior in custody disputing parents. Abstract book 23th World congress of the international association for child and adolescent psychiatry and allied professions. 23–27 July 2018. RS 07.3. 43. McGaw S. Parent assessment manual. Trecare NHS Trust; 1999. 150 p.

Метрики статей

Загрузка метрик ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM