VRAs, Civil Competencies, Forensic Tx Flashcards

1
Q

Barefoot v Estelle

1983

A

Psychiatric opinions about dangerousness were valid and acceptable in court

Coble v Texas (2010) - Must provide evidence that such testimony meets Daubert standards

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Kansas v Hendricks

1997

A

Courts can impose a civil means of lengthening commitment post-sentence for certain populations (SVPs), noting that risk assessment must demonstrate uncontrollable bxs and the person be at high risk

(Solidified appropriateness of risk assessment in court, some states began requiring the use of risk assessment measures in these cases)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

History of risk assessment

A

Monahan 1981 - psychologists and psychiatrists are accurate no more than 33% of the time

Then came the MacArthur Study, other studies by Monahan reevaluated, and while were still not great at risk prediction, we have many more clinical indicators with which to go off

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Actuarial Risk Assessment Measures

A

VRAG - 600 men from a max security hospital with “serious offenses,” regression models revealed 12 variables for inclusion

HCR-20 - contains 20 items addressing historical, clinical, and risk management variables; scores above the media on can indicate 6-13xs more likely to be violent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study

In general

A

Large group of inpatients from acute civil inpatient facilities

18-40yo, multiple ethnicities, male and female

Looked at demographic variables, historical variables (work hx, hx of violence, family hx), contextual variables (social support, stress, presence of weapons), and clinical variables (sxs, type of disorder, substance abuse, level of functioning)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Some variables from the MacArthur Study

A

Sex (men), prior violence, childhood experience of violence (physical abuse only), dx (co-occurring substance disorder increased risk), psychopathy (not predictive!), delusions (not associated), hallucinations (commands to commit violent acts specifically), violent thoughts, anger

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Ideal approach to violence risk assessment

A

Using a combination approach…over any single actuarial assessment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

When can you allow clinical judgement into actuarial risk assessment

A

When there is questionable validity generalization - when your person falls outside the norm group (white men)

Rare risk or protective factors - broken leg countervailings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Four steps to the VRA process

A

Identifying empirically valid risk factors
Determine the method for scoring the risk factors
Establishing a procedure for combining the scores
Producing an estimate of violence risk

Pure clinical judgement uses none of these, VRA based on a list of risk factors uses one, SPJ uses two, VRAG has all four

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Communicating risk assessment

A

Use multiple methods

Utilize probabilistic descriptors (%) for common events
Utilize categorical descriptors (low, med, high) for rarer events

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Tarasoff v Board of Regents

1976

A

Therapists DO have a duty to protect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Kansas v Crane

2002

A

Dangerous individuals needn’t be COMPLETELY unable to control their behavior in order to be committed by the state

(SVP case)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Sexual Offender Risk Assessment Tools

A

Static-99-R
10 items, AUC .69-.79, doesn’t include all factors relevant

SVR-20
SPJ measure, 20 factors, AUC .56-.83, less research than the STATIC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is guardianship

A

A legal mechanism by which the state delegates authority over an individuals person or estate to another party

Guardian - health decisions
Conservator - finances
Guardians can be oversee everything (plenary) or limited to a certain need

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is a commonly used, less restrictive alternative to guardianship?

A

An advanced directive

Created to avoid the stigma of being a ward

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Guardianship hearings

A
Less rigorous than civil commitment
Most last 15 minutes or less
Proposed ward didn’t attend 2/3 of them
Reports lacked detail
Expert was present at 8% of them

States set forth ambiguous benchmarks for what is required (“mental illness”)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

In re Boyer

A

Guardianship

Utah statute was too vague and state Supreme Court pressed for an inability-to-care-for-self standard (grave disability)

Many states take a slightly better approach, looking at functional impairment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Evidentiary standard for guardianship

A

Some states require considerable evidence of incompetence, others just ask for proof that the person made an incompetent decision (like foolishly spending a lot of money)

Many states don’t require guardianship evaluations prior to a court proceeding, but they can be granted if demanded by the petitioner

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Things to consider with guardianship evaluations

A

Whether incapacity is due to deficits in hearing, sight, processing speed, etc.
Effect the environment may have on perceived incapacities (atrophy in a skill set due to environment discouraging to do so)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Direct Assessment of Functional Status

A

Guardianship, highly studied instrument

Contains items that assess a variety of functional domains, requires the individual to perform sets of activities that the evaluator assigns points to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Assessment Capacity for Everyday Decision Making

A

Assesses persons capacity to make a decision with regard to solving their own functional problems

Includes semi structured interview, competency rubric developed by Grisso and Appelbaum

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Advanced directive

A

Instructions from a competent individual, directing or authorizing certain actions if the person becomes unable to make their own decisions

Intended to protect autonomy by delegating wishes to someone else

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Durable Power of Attorney

A

Used to cover nonterminal situations as well as directions concerning property

24
Q

Competence to make treatment decisions

Requirements of informed consent

A

Promote autonomy

Encourage rational decision making

Protect safety/welfare of patients or research subjects

25
Q

Components of a valid informed consent

A

Appropriate disclosure - what a patient would need to know in order to make an informed decision

A competent patient - presumed unless person has mental disability or is a minor (expression of preference, understanding, appreciation, reasonable decision, reasonable outcome)

Voluntary consent - legal concept the law has not defined well…

26
Q

Constitutional protections behind right to refuse psychoactive medication

A
Right to freedom of speech/thought
Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment
Equal protections (should be able to refuse like persons without MI)
Right to privacy and bodily integrity
27
Q

Competency to make treatment decisions

A

Determine what they’ve been told so far about the tx (teach and educate as needed)
Why they think the tx is necessary
Risk and benefits of tx
Ability to reason through their own case and apply it
What are their reasons for refusing or consenting

28
Q

MacCAT-T

A

Competency to make treatment decisions

20 minutes to administer
Semi structured interview
Results in highly reliable clinical judgements

29
Q

Capacity to Consent to Treatment Instrument

A

Hypothetical clinical vignettes with treatments and alternatives, discuss and reason through pros and cons of each

Developed specifically for Alzheimer’s patients but can be used with other populations as well

30
Q

Instruments for competency to make treatment decisions

A

MacCAT-T

CCTI

31
Q

Three types of psychological advanced directives

A

Patient expresses their treatment preferences

Designates a proxy decisionmaker

Hybrid

(Competency assessment tool for psychiatric advance directives CAT-PAD)

32
Q

Testsmentary capacity

A

Competence to execute a will

Must be of sound mind, know they’re making a will, know objects in their bounty and extent of their property, know manner in which the wills distribute their property

Can be current, retrospective eval after death, or looking at undue influence

33
Q

Differences between criminal and civil commitment

A

Police power v parens patriae

Criminal conduct that has occurred v future harm to self

Beyond reasonable doubt v clear and convincing

34
Q

Improvements to civil commitment in the 1970s

Types of lawsuits

A

Challenges to procedural criteria

Suits concerning institutional conditions (right to tx, least restrictive)

Claims of how tx was administered (right to refuse tx)

35
Q

General requirements for civil commitment

A

Has a mental disorder

Dangerous to self or others as a result of the mental disorder

Commitment hearing -> Tx must occur in least restrictive environment

36
Q

Civil commitment

Need for treatment

A

Built into most state statues

Looks like language discussing risk of deteriorating without tx

37
Q

Kendra’s Law

A

Proposed by NAMI, enacted by NY state

Forces people to comply with outpatient treatment (but does not require forced meds)

38
Q

Four exceptions to informed consent

A

Emergencies

If it is waived by the patient

If the informed consent process would cause harm to the patient

When the patient is incompetent

39
Q

Two stages of inpatient commitment

A

Emergency admission - like a 72hr hold, no court involvement

Long term commitment - requires judicial approval and an adversarial proceeding, can request jury trial, right to have a judge make the ultimate decision

40
Q

Commitment of special populations

A

Parham - child’s commitment only requires a physical determine there is a need for tx (leads to troubling kids getting tx without mental illness)

Vitek - convicted persons are entitled to a hearing before seeing if they should be transferred to a psychiatric facility

41
Q

Civil commit standard for those with ID

Generally

A

As a result of ID, the person is likely to injure others or lacks the basic self care or survival skills necessary

42
Q

Canterbury v Spence

1972

A

A physician can be liable for malpractice if they fail to disclose rare but severe risks inherent in a medical procedure

43
Q

Foucha v Louisiana

1992

A

An insanity acquittee must be both mentally ill and dangerous for a state to justify continued hospitalization

44
Q

Jones v US

1983

A

NGRI acquittees can be subject to involuntary and indefinite commitment

45
Q

Lake v Cameron

1966

A

A civilly committed patient cannot be involuntarily held in a hospital if there are safer and less restrictive treatment alternatives available

46
Q

Lessard v Schmidt

1972

A

Those facing civil commitment should be afforded the same protections as those facing criminal commitment

47
Q

O’Connor v Donaldson

1975

A

Mentally ill persons cannot be involuntarily hospitalized if they are not dangerous

48
Q

Addington v Texas

1979

A

Clear and convincing is the appropriate burden of proof for civil commitment

49
Q

Parham v JR

1979

A

Adversarial hearings are not required for the commitment of a juvenile whose parents or guardian requested the commitment

50
Q

Rennie v Klein

1980s

A

Civilly committed persons do not need to have a court order for forced meds

But they have the right to refuse, physician must approach from a “professional judgement” standard

51
Q

Zinermon v Burch

1990

A

Incompetent individuals cannot consent to voluntary hospitalization

52
Q

Washington v Harper

1990

A

Judicial hearings are not required to satisfy due process for prisoners found to be dangerous and refusing psychiatric medication

53
Q

Wyatt v Stickney

1972

A

Individuals committed for MI/MR are entitled to “minimally adequate” standards for psychiatric treatment

54
Q

Types of Evaluation Systems

A

Institution based inpatient - eval and tx in the hospital
Institution based outpatient - eval inpt and tx in the hospital
Community based outpatient - evals and tx provided by local agencies
Community based private practice model - no agency or state hospital involvement, individual practitioners are appointed by the court
Mixed - capitalizing in available community resources and supplementing when needed

55
Q

Forensic treatment systems best suited for large populations

A

Decentralized systems with a few locations throughout the state