Like the Republic of South Africa, the United States faces serious challenges regarding fitness to stand trial evaluations, including long waitlists for individuals awaiting such evaluations. Some similarities exist between the RSA and US evaluation systems, including an increasing number of referrals for fitness to stand trial evaluations, limited evaluator resources, and concerns about the significant restrictions on civil liberties for those awaiting evaluation. Recently, the United States has implemented several different solutions to address these issues. These have included broadening the eligibility requirements for fitness to stand trial evaluators, utilizing localized and short-term settings for fitness to stand trial evaluations, and a host of other ideas. This article examines these different solutions, discusses their relevance and potential effectiveness for the RSA evaluation system, and makes recommendations for consideration by policy makers and mental health professionals.
AltamuraA. C.BuoliM.SeratiM. (2011). Duration of illness and duration of untreated illness in relation to drug response in psychiatric disorders. Neuropsychiatry, 1, 81–90.
2.
CervantesA. N.GowensmithW. N. (October23, 2015). Cost shifting consequences in the quest for competency. Poster presentation at the 46th meeting of the American Association of Psychiatry and Law. Fort Lauderdale, FL.
3.
DattilioF. M. (2011). Towards a good fit between psychiatrists and psychologists. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 39, 689–696.
4.
DeMatteoD.LaDukeC.LocklairB. R.HeilbrunK. (2013). Community-based alternatives for justice-involved individuals with severe mental illness: Diversion, problem-solving courts, and reentry. Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 64–71.
5.
Dusky v. United States, 362 US 402, 1960.
6.
ElbogenE. B.MercadoC. C.ScaloraM. J.TomkinsA. J. (2002). Perceived relevance of factors for violence risk assessment: A survey of clinicians. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1, 37–47.
7.
FrostL. E.de CamaraR. L.EarlT. R. (2006). Case report: Training, certification, and regulation of forensic evaluators. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 6, 77–91.
8.
FugerK. D.AcklinM. W.NguyenA. H.IgnacioL. A.GowensmithW. N. (2014). Quality of criminal responsibility reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 37, 272–280.
9.
GlazeE. L.KaebleD. (2014). Correctional populations in the United States (BJS Publication No. NCJ 248479). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
10.
GowensmithW. N.BryantA.VitaccoM. (2014). Decision-making in post-acquittal hospital release: How do forensic evaluators make their decisions?Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 32, 596–607.
11.
GowensmithW. N.MetrozH.BratcherJ. (2016, March). The impact of timing on competency to stand trial evaluations. Paper presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society, Atlanta, GA.
12.
GowensmithW. N.MurrieD. C.BoccacciniM. T. (2013). How reliable are forensic evaluations of legal sanity?Law and Human Behavior, 37, 98–106.
13.
GowensmithW. N.MurrieD. M.PackerI. K. (2014). Forensic mental health consultant review final report (Contract No. 1334–91698). Vancouver, WA: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services.
14.
GowensmithW. N.MurrieD. M.PackerI. K. (2015). Report in response to the Trueblood v. State Washington’s Department of Social and Health Services (Office of Attorney General, State of Washington). Vancouver, WA: Washington State Department of Social and Health Services.
15.
GowensmithW. N.PinalsD. A.KarasA. C. (2015). States’ standards for training and certifying evaluators of competency to stand trial. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 15, 295–317.
16.
GowensmithW. N.SleddM.SessaregoS. (2015, March). The impact of stringent certification standards on forensic evaluator reliability: Further analysis. Paper presentation for the 2015 annual meeting of the American Psychology–Law Society, San Diego, CA.
17.
GreenbergJ.WurstenA. (1988). The psychologist and the psychiatrist as expert witnesses: Perceived credibility and influence. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 19, 373–378.
18.
HayesL. M. (1995). Prison suicide: An overview and a guide to prevention. Prison Journal, 75, 431–456.
19.
HeilbrunK.DeMatteoD.YasuharaK.Brooks-HollidayS.ShahS.KingC.. . . LadukeC. (2012). Community-based alternatives for justice-involved individuals with severe mental illness review of the relevant research. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39, 351–419.
20.
HenrichsonC.DelaneyR. (2012). The price of prisons: What incarceration costs taxpayers. New York: Vera Institute of Justice.
21.
Janse van RensburgB.AllenR.Alonso-BetancourtO.BurnsJ.ChabalalaJ.ErlacherH.. . . ZingelaZ. (2012). The South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP) and SASOP State Employed Special Interest Group (SESIG) position statements on psychiatric care in the public sector. South African Journal of Psychiatry, 18, 133–147.
22.
Jenkins v. United States (1962). 307 F.2d 637; 113 U.S. App. D.C. 300.
23.
KaliskiS. Z. (2006). The criminal defendant. In KaliskiS. (Ed.), Psycholegal assessment in South Africa (pp. 93–112). Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press.
24.
LargeM.NielssenO.ElliottG. (2009). Reliability of psychiatric evidence in serious criminal matters: Fitness to stand trial and the defense of mental illness. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 43, 446–452.
25.
LiebermanJ. A.FentonW. S. (2000). Delayed detection of psychosis: Causes, consequences, and effect on public health. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1727–1730.
26.
LocklairB. (2016, March). Due process problems with civil commitment of incompetent defendants: The current round of litigation and the next. Presentation to the American Psychology-Law Society Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA.
27.
MarsM.RamlallS.KaliskiS. (2012). Forensic telepsychiatry: A possible solution for South Africa?African Journal of Psychiatry, 15, 244–247.
28.
MeltonG. B.PetrilaJ.PoythressN. G.SloboginC. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
29.
MunetzM. R.GriffinP. A. (2006). Use of the sequential intercept model as an approach to decriminalization of people with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 57, 544–549.
30.
OdehM. S.ZeissR. A.HussM. T. (2006). Cues they use: Clinicians’ endorsement of risk cues in predictions of dangerousness. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 147–156.
31.
Oregon Advocacy Center v. Mink. No., 02–35530, 9th Cir., March6, 2003.
32.
PackerI. K. (2009). Evaluation of criminal responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
PerlinM. L. (1977). The legal status of the psychologist in the courtroom. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 5, 41–54.
34.
PetrellaR. C.PoythressN. G. (1983). The quality of forensic evaluations: An interdisciplinary study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 76–85.
35.
PillayA. L. (2014). Competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility examinations: Are there solutions to the extensive waiting list?South African Journal of Psychology, 44, 48–59.
36.
PirelliG.GottdienerW. H.ZapfP. A. (2011). A meta-analytic review of competency to stand trial research. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 1–53.
37.
PoythressN. G. (1983). Psychological issues in criminal proceedings: Judicial preference regarding expert testimony. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 10, 175–194.
38.
PoythressN. G.NicholsonR.OttoR.EdensJ. K.BonnieR.HogeS. (1999). The MacCAT-CA: The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool—Criminal Adjudication professional manual. Lutz, FL: Professional Assessment Resources.
RobinsonR.AcklinM. W. (2010). Fitness in paradise: Quality of forensic reports submitted to the Hawaii judiciary. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 131–137.
43.
RogersR.TillbrookC. E.SewellK. W. (2004). Evaluation of competency to stand trial—Revised professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
TorreyE. F.KennardA. D.EslingerD.LambR.PavleJ. (2010). More mentally ill persons are in jails and prisons than hospitals: A survey of the states. Arlington, VA: Treatment Advocacy Center.
49.
Trueblood v. State of Washington Department of Human and Social Services. No. 2, 2014cv01178, Washington Western District Court, 2015.
50.
United States Department of Justice. Hearings before the Committee on Judiciary, Senate. 119th Cong, 3 (2013). (Testimony of Charles Samuels).
51.
ViljoenJ. L.RoeschJ. R. P.OgloffJ. R. P.ZapfP. (2003). The role of Canadian psychologists in conducting fitness and criminal responsibility evaluations. Canadian Psychology, 44, 369–381.
52.
WarrenJ. I.MurrieD. C.StejskalW.ColwellL. H.MorrisJ.ChauhanP.DietzP. (2006). Opinion formation in evaluating the adjudicative competence and restorability of criminal defendants: A review of 8,000 evaluations. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 113–132.
53.
WeissE. A. (2004, March22–26). Forensic psychiatric services: Limpopo province. Paper presented at the First Regional Congress of Social Psychiatry in Africa, Johannesburg, South Africa.
54.
WeissE. A. (2013, April24–25). Report on forensic psychiatric services 2012 Limpopo province. Paper presented at the Interdepartmental Forensic Mental Health Conference, Johannesburg, South Africa.
55.
ZapfP. A.HubbardK. L.CooperV. G.WheelesM. C.RonanK. A. (2004). Have the Courts abdicated their responsibility for determination of competency to stand trial to clinicians?Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 4, 27–44.
