Category: Forensic Psychology

To understand what the differences are between Clinical Psychology and Forensic Psychology, one must first know exactly what they are. Clinical Psychology is when individuals complete research, and strategies for the treatment, diagnosis, or assessment of human behavior and functioning. Clinical Psychology they are considered to be very beneficial to the clients they serve. Forensic Psychology is defined as a department that relates to the law. Their primary role is to inquire about human behavior that and/or can be related to the lawful handle. The exercise of Clinical Psychology is very huge and can range from the use of psychotherapy, or counseling with a wide spectrum of clients to the use of standardized assessment instruments, considered as testing.

That which differentiates psychologists from all one-of-a-kind mental health experts is teaching in the use of standardized trying out devices and training in decoding the penalties of these tests. Most people anticipate Psychologists as counselors, however, nearly all of the mental health fields are specialists in exercising counseling. Only Psychologists are knowledgeable to administer and interpret wonderful sorts of tests.

Clinical Psychologists usually function checking out to make clear or set up diagnoses. This can be very really helpful to incapacity evaluators, parents, teachers, and/or physicians. The exercising of psychology is likely underused in defining diagnoses. Though Forensic Psychology is a discipline of its own, it typically requires a robust heritage in Clinical Psychology. Forensic Psychologists reply to psycho-legal questions for attorneys, judges, probation officers, and others involved with the criminal system.

To practice Forensic Psychology, a Psychologist needs to be skilled to administer a specific set of instruments. These gadgets have been developed to measure sure criminal constructs generally set up by means of statute and case law. Once a psychologist renders an opinion, for example, an opinion that a man or woman is no longer capable to stand trial, then the Psychologist will turn to Clinical Instruments to strive to give an explanation for the causation of the incompetency, or why the man or woman is likely not competent to proceed with felony proceedings.

There are different differences between Clinical and Forensic Psychology. A Clinical Psychologist commonly is recommended for his or her purchaser or patient. A Forensic Psychologist, on the extraordinary hand, is typically working for an attorney, judge, or some other jail authority. The consumer is the one who hires the Psychologist and the man or woman being evaluated is the examinee. The Psychologist can release the consequences of an assessment fully to the man or woman who requested the evaluation (i.e., attorney, judge, probation officer, etc.). In essence, a Forensic Psychologist needs a strong record in Clinical Psychology, but a Clinical Psychologist wishes for no historical past in Forensic Psychology.

References

1. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psn/2013/09/forensic-psychology
2. (2019). Retrieved from http://www.reidpsychiatry.com/reidfaq.html

A jury contains twelve lay people who’ve been randomly selected and sworn to conduct an impartial verdict as to whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty beyond all reasonable doubt in a criminal trial. The purpose of the jury is to provide a fair and just outcome based on the facts to reach a verdict and this can’t be achieved by judges alone as the decision would be prejudicial and create unfairness. As juries are unaware of any details, their opinions don’t favor one side. There should be no biases in court and one’s fate shouldn’t be decided by one person alone hence why having a jury allows individuals to have a fair trial. This creates a better judgment. In addition, a jury consists of ordinary people who want justice to be served correctly. This essay will discuss whether it is important for the selection of the jury to be random.

The Juries Act 1974 is the governing legislation that controls the jury system by clarifying who qualifies for jury service and establishing the right to challenge jurors. The Crown court recruits jurors to hear a case. Their names are selected from the electoral register which is randomly done by the computer. Those who are summoned should attend jury service and they must notify the court instantly if they can’t appear. If they don’t return the jury summons form or arrive for their service, then this can result in a fine of £1,000. Those who have agreed to serve on the jury must attend for ten days and if the case lasts longer than two weeks, jurors would be expected to stay beyond their service. You will be eternally disqualified from jury service if you’ve been sentenced to life imprisonment and you won’t be permitted to serve as a juror for ten years if, in the last ten years, you have served a prison sentence. You’re also disqualified if you’re currently on bail. If you fail to tell the court you’re a prohibited person, you could be fined up to £5000. In addition, you can be disqualified if you are mentally disordered. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is also capable of restricting the role of the jury by imposing more limitations on the eligibility criteria.

Jurors should be vetted, meaning they should be checked for sustainability. There are two forms of vetting. A routine police check is where a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check is done on each juror to make sure they’ve not been disqualified. This can be seen in R v Mason [1980]. A more thorough, wider background check is essential to give further protection against the chance of bias. This can be referred to as an Authorised Jury Check. The Attorney General said that vetting of juries should only take place in exceptional cases which involve national security and terrorist cases and it can only be done with the permission of the Attorney General.

When the jurors enter the court, they will be challenged by the defense and prosecution. You will be removed if your presence represents a ‘real danger of bias’. The two challenges are to array and for the cause. To array will test the jury on the basis that it’s been chosen in an unrepresentative or biased way. A challenge to the array was used in R v Ford [1989] where it was held that if the jury was chosen at random then it can’t be challenged because it wasn’t multi-racial. A challenge for cause will test the juror’s right to be on the jury. To be successful, the challenging party must provide a genuine reason why the juror must not sit on the case. If these jurors aren’t removed from the jury, there’s potential for the case conviction to be quashed due to a miscarriage of justice.

The role of the jury is a controversial part of the judicial system. Some say it’s important that jury selection is random. Juries should be selected at random as it ensures that there will be a trial by your peers rather than one that has been manipulated. The Magna Carta laid out the binding rule of law and included the concept of a right to a fair trial. Part of this is to be “judged by a jury of your peers”. This means that they are no more experienced in the law than the people they are judging.

The jury can show public confidence as it maintains the right to be tried by one’s peers. Lord Devlin quoted “Trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution. It is the lamp that shows that freedom lives”. This displays the fairness of a jury trial. Rather than following the law, jurors tend to act with their own common sense. This can be demonstrated in the case of R v Wang [2005], where a man was charged with having a blade in a public place. The judge told the jury to find him guilty, but it was argued that the jury should be allowed to decide on the evidence what a fair verdict was despite what the law said the outcome should be. No one can tell a jury to find a guilty verdict. A jury must decide based on what is fair as they should be independent and be free from bias.

Although jurors are chosen at random and aren’t involved in the case, they may still have prejudice which can affect the verdict. Bias may encompass deliberate hostility, inadvertent knowledge of the defendant’s bad character, alleged racism, acquaintance with prosecution witnesses, or a close nexus with the case in some way. Some jurors are racially biased. In the case of Sander v United Kingdom [2000], jurors made racist comments and jokes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held the judge should have discharged the jury due to the danger of racial bias and the right to a fair trial under the Human Rights Act 1998. Racial bias is unjustified in law and is also belittling of the members of the jury.

Jurors may lack experience and cannot make fair judgments. This could be a reason why the random selection is negative as their absence of knowledge could result in an incorrect decision as they are unable to understand the distinction in the law. The Ministry of Justice commissioned research in 2010 in which it was reported that 60 percent of jurors do not understand the judge’s legal directions when they retire to consider their verdicts. The report stated that ‘While over half of the jurors perceived the judge’s directions as easy to understand, only a minority (31%) actually understood the directions fully in the legal terms used by the judge’. Also, juries acquit more than magistrates do which shows the inability to perform their function properly. Lord Denning argues that “Jurors are summoned who are not sufficiently intelligent or educated to perform their task” and argues that the jury should be chosen like magistrates. A case that shows jurors are incapable is R v Young [1995] where the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial of a man convicted of double murder because four of the jurors had tried to contact the victims using an Ouija board. Also, the secrecy of the jury room may protect jurors from pressure but secrecy means the reason for the decision is not known and the jury’s understanding of the case cannot be checked as no reason has to be given for the verdict which can be demonstrated in R v Mirza [2004].

I agree it is important that jury selection is random as it’s fairer and less likely to be biased. Although some jurors may dislike having to serve, jury selection is a vital part of the legal process. The random selection method ensures that race, gender, religion, or other prejudices do not influence jury selection and helps all individuals to get a fair trial. However, there are debates about the selection process. There are several areas where the criminal justice system should better assist jurors in performing their vital role. It should become more representative and diverse in relation to racial bias and jurors should be more widely represented than they are. Also, jury selection could provide a solution to the problem of inexperienced people making the wrong choice so that they have the correct knowledge and capacity to give verdicts.

Devin M. Hanson is a staff psychologist at a medical center- a clinical psychologist who works in the psychology operant and does psychotherapy. Psychotherapy is the treatment of mental disorders by psychological rather than medical means. On September 20th, 2019 he agreed to let me interview him over the phone. I was interested in his work experience since he has worked in a forensic psychology setting which is where I ultimately want to end up. We were able to speak for approximately 45 minutes. He was able to not only answer my questions but also provide me with the information I didn’t even think to ask about or had any idea about.

Hanson decided he was interested in psychology young, and in college became interested in clinical psychology. He trained in a forensic psychology setting and found it interesting. Taking practicums, and internships a few days a week, while doing classes, research, and teaching for 15 months at the forensic center, which he loved doing. At the end of the 5-year period, if everything is good, a student in this field will do a predoctoral internship which Hanson did. He then applied to a lot of forensic fields but it’s a competitive environment and he didn’t match, but matched at a VA hospital, for two years, and ended up getting a job at a medical center. When I asked what the downsides of forensic psychology are, Hanson responded that “it’s not a focus on treating someone to help them, the clinical aim is to help, in forensics, the goal is not to help the person in front of you but solve a crime, your evaluation could end up leading them to prison, a different frame and reference of psychology”. Where he is now, he is fully committed to helping another person without reservation, which is why he switched from being a forensic psychologist to a clinical psychologist.

He worked at the center for forensic psychology, the state forensic psychiatric hospital near Ann arbor. The Center for Forensic Psychiatry is an inpatient psychiatric hospital that provides diagnostic services to the criminal justice system and psychiatric treatment for criminal defendants incompetent to stand trial or acquitted by not guilty by reason of insanity. A judge or jury decides who qualifies to be acquitted, and who can be admitted to the facility. This Facility covers all counties in the state of Michigan.

Everyone here at the center for forensic phycology that has a Ph.D. has the credentials to become a forensic examiner. This requires meeting with patients, interviewing them, and writing up a long report, some testify and provide info to the courts, state level wants to know that you’re an expert. Others have masters who let them work as psychometrics and do psychological testing.

Hanson said he did not fully appreciate how long grad school would take and all the hoops it would take to get there as it’s a lot longer than expected. With grad school, he says it’s ideal to have a pretty clear sense of direction, what you want to focus on, and specialize in a more clear-cut path from the beginning. Recognize that things happen and it’s ok, you may change your path, but as long as you have a plan for the long run, even if that plan changes, then it’s all going to work out. While attending school, Devin Hanson had to take a wide range of classes,

Psychology classes, social psychology, development, and stats. After school to actually work in the field, Hanson had to go through progressing levels of training. one of the interns, one of the fellowships, as you work up, their more independence and more responsibility you get.

When asked what kind of advice he would have for someone going into this line of work, Hanson suggested looking into the different roles in forensic psychology. The psychologist there has a Ph.D. in psych, is a clinical psychologist, and has had some postgraduate training in forensics. Really dive into the different levels of education and training because it’s possible to do without a Ph.D. to save time and money. Try as early as possible to get exposure to that type of work and settings of forensic psych works to make sure it’s a good fit. Consult with others who are currently practicing. Some advice Hanson repeated throughout this interview is that for grad school, GPA is important. Facility advisors may say don’t take harder classes if it’ll negatively affect your GPA. Involvement in research, especially for Ph.D. programs. Any and all research involvement, volunteering, get as much experience and get your name out there.

In the future, Hanson sees plenty of changes coming, right now there is a large focus on therapy, and he sees a lot more therapy happening over video. Hanson worked at veterans’ affairs and while there, they did a lot of teleconferences. A lot more video therapy is happening, and he sees it becoming a bigger and more normalized thing.

This interview was very enjoyable and I’m glad I was able to make a connection in the field I’m interested in, and talk to someone who actually worked in that field. I appreciate Devin Hanson for taking time out of his day and educating me on the field.

Introduction

Forensic psychology refers to the professional application of specialized knowledge in psychology to aid in solving legal problems. Since forensic psychology straddles two great fields- the study of human behaviors (psychology) and correctional measures that can deter wayward behaviors (law), its guide on ethics should be two-throng. Robert Wettstein agrees: Given the interdisciplinary work of forensic psychiatry, questions arise about what principles of ethics should guide forensic psychiatry and what theory of ethics should underlie those principles

Discussion

When it comes to ethics, forensic psychology is one field of professional practice where a very delicate balance must be created. This is so because a forensic psychologist is more interested in the inner feelings of the offender than the displayed characters. Further, the forensic psychologist must understand the legal requirements and the judicial system under which he operates. So, the expert is required to bridge the wide gap between two very diverse, and even opposing faculties. Since his analysis informs the outcome of the case. Professionals must practice adherence to a particular code of conduct without the need for monitoring.

Ethical issues in forensic psychology

Confidentiality: keep information about clients confidential along with discussing the limits of confidentiality and the foreseeable uses of the information CITATION Eth10 t l 1033 (2010)Informed consent: According to the American Psychological Association if the person is legally incapable of giving informed consent, the practitioner must seek either substitute the judgment of a legally-authorized individual, such as the attorney of record, or seek to obtain a Court Order The informed consent must be documented.

Documentation, record-keeping, and fees

Practitioners are expected to keep records in order to facilitate the provision of services in the future; any replication of research of these records should be maintained confidentially and records cannot be withheld when they are needed for an emergency purposeCITATION Spe10 n t l 1033 (2010).

Forensic Methodology

Forensic practitioners do not distort or withhold relevant evidence or opinions, do not misrepresent evidence, and do not attempt to avoid or deny contrary evidence.CITATION Spe101 n t l 1033 (2010) It is an affirmative obligation to disclose all sources

Conclusion:

Ethics is one of the guiding principles in any profession the world over. It ensures that one sets standards for himself and strives to reach them. The infusion of ethical-legal issues into a single field called forensic psychology makes this profession a particularly challenging one. Just reading the ethical guidelines and standards is not enough. As a professional, your adherence to them should show in the applications. In special cases, use your own unbiased judgment and intuition to get to the root of the problem. Word Count: 1000 words

References

1. BIBLIOGRAPHY ACHE. (2011). Retrieved from ACHE. (2011). ACHE Code of Ethics: Retrieved from. https:www.ache.orgabt_achecode.cfm.
2. Barker, P. J. (2011). Mental health ethics: The human context. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Barker, P. J. (2011). Mental health ethics: The human context. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
3. Connor, W. E. (2013). Connor, W. E. (2013). Code of Ethics: Retrieved from. https:secure.ethicspoint.comdomainmediaengui15228Code_of_Ethics_1_22_07.pdf.
4. Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. (2010).
5. Ethical principles of ethics for psychologists. (2010).
6. Gerig, M. S. (2007). Gerig, M. S. (2007). Foundations for mental health and community counseling: An introduction to the profession. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson, Merrill

Juries are made up of a variety of people from various backgrounds with differing beliefs. This in turn allows for a range of opinions to be expressed, which generally reflect community values and standards on the issues in any given case. An influential factor of jury decision-making examined closely in forensic psychology is expertise. Expertise, which typically takes the form of an expert witness or testimony in this context, has the benefit of either helping a jury better understand the information presented in a case with complicated issues, or countering misinformation held by a given juror. However, the field of forensic psychology is concerned about the fine line between merely correcting misinformation about case evidence and completely biasing a juror’s perception of the evidence towards a particular stance. This essay will discuss the benefits and limitations of expertise in forensic psychology, specifically focusing on how these factors affect jury decision-making. Based on this information, this essay will then suggest solutions to improve expertise input in this area of forensic psychology. Overall, both judges and jurors need to be educated on evaluating the quality of expert evidence, and the court must be more cautious in ensuring that the jury is diverse in both background and opinions.

Benefits of Expertise

In any given court case, jurors are expected to only consider the facts and evidence presented in the case without any prior research that may interfere with the relevant issues in the case. However, at the same time, jurors are expected to utilize their own personal experience when reaching a decision. According to Winter and Greene (2007), jurors rely on a ‘story model’, where the juror will create a narrative based on the presented evidence and makes a decision based on which narrative fits the verdict options best. As the construction of this narrative is based on prior experiences and beliefs, this will affect the juror’s interpretation of the evidence and therefore, their decision. Knowing this, jurors benefit greatly from expert testimonies that can correct previously held misconceptions about present issues that may affect a juror’s verdict. One such type of case where the perception of evidence is prone to misinformation is sexual abuse cases, as the circulation and influence of rape myths are vast. Goodman-Delahunty, Cossins, and O’Brien (2011) found in a mock child sexual abuse case that jurors were more likely to convict the defendant and view the complainant’s evidence as more credible if jurors were presented with an expert testimony describing the behavior and memory of sexually abused children and why this was the case. Similarly, in Ryan and Westera’s study (2018), a combination of presenting a cognitive statement from the complainant and an expert testimony both explaining the reasoning behind the complainant’s behavior towards the defendant’s advances during a mock rape trial increased the jury’s collective perception of the defendant’s blameworthiness. This was also shown to be more effective than showing just the cognitive statement or the expert testimony only, as presenting both reduced ambiguity of information and potential reliance on rape myths. Additionally, this benefit of education and misinformation correction from expertise can also be found within the jury itself. It is not uncommon to have ‘juror-experts’ on the jury, who are defined as jurors with occupational knowledge relevant to the issues at hand. According to Diamond, Rose, and Murphy’s study (2014), juries benefitted from juror experts having the ability to clarify certain points of evidence shared by an expert that was not fully understood by the rest of the jury. Furthermore, although juror experts were noted to actively contribute more than jurors without relevant expertise to the case, they were not more likely to take leadership during deliberations, hold one-sided views or question opposing juror views more so than their fellow jurors. In summary, juries benefit greatly from expertise, as expert witnesses or juror experts are able to explain difficult concepts in particular law cases and correct misinformation.

Limitations of Expertise

However, there are many limitations to expertise in jury decision-making. The primary limitation of expertise is that it can negatively impact the way in which a juror interprets the issues presented in the case. For example, in US capital punishment cases, jurors must be ‘death-qualified’, meaning that must be able to vote for a death sentence if the evidence is in favor of it. However, although they would be considered ‘experts’ in these kinds of cases, death-qualified jurors have been noted to hold biases in their decision-making. Bowers, Sandy, and Steiners (1998) showed that both pro-death and pro-life jurors already held personal judgments corresponding to their stance on capital punishment prior to the commencement of the trial. Furthermore, in the same study, many death-qualified jurors expressed a predisposition that the only acceptable punishment for particular crimes was the death penalty. This ties in not only with the concept of the story model where a given juror’s verdict is affected by their experiences and beliefs but is also related to an expert’s limitation of inflexibility, where experts are unable to adapt to tasks that are inconsistent with their prior knowledge (Lewandowsky, Little & Kalish, 2007). In this particular case, to take a pro-life stance in sentencing would be inconsistent with a death-qualified juror’s prior knowledge base, as they are predisposed to be able to follow through with a death sentence. The creation of a jury that is completely pro-death also presents issues regarding how well the formed jury reflects the demographic of the community and its values. A study by Lynch and Haney (2018) found that jurors who were death-qualified were more likely to be Caucasian than African American, and more likely to be male than female. An additional limitation of expertise in jury decision-making is that jurors seem to lack the ability to assess the credibility and validity of expert testimonies. It was found in Martire and Kemp’s study (2009) that although separate groups of jurors were given different information by expert witnesses on confidence as a predictor of eyewitness accuracy, the overall performance of both groups in judging if the eyewitness was correct or not did seem to be influenced by the congruency of the expertise given. These points highlight that a juror’s evaluation of case evidence can be highly subjective and prone to personal biases, even when there is an expert present to counter misinformation.

Suggestions for Improving Jury Decision Making

Based on the benefits and limitations of expertise in jury decision-making aforementioned, this essay will now suggest several solutions in which the limitations of expertise can be lessened whilst still maintaining its benefits. One of the main limitations mentioned earlier was that jurors do not have the full capacity to critically evaluate expert testimony. While it is the expert’s task to educate the jury, it is up to the jury to process the presented facts as objectively as possible, both from the case and the expert, in order to reach a just decision. A potential suggestion to combat this limitation would be to further educate jurors about critical thinking and the evaluation of evidence. Perhaps enrolling jurors in a short, online course a few days before a trial about how to evaluate evidence and expert testimonies, or giving jurors access to an information pack about their roles and responsibilities, would better ensure that jurors are more prepared in assessing the facts of the case and from that make a scientifically informed, thought through decision. Moreover, the judge also plays a significant role in helping the jury understand the scientific quality of their evidence, so education must also be conducted for judges to improve their ability to assess the quality of expert testimonies, as well as ask questions to the expert witness that will aid jurors in evaluating the credibility of their evidence (Chorn & Kovera, 2019). Another limitation mentioned earlier was that a juror’s verdict on a case may already be decided prior to entering the trial, especially in the instance of capital punishment cases as aforementioned. Sandys and Trahan (2008) suggested that prospective jurors entering a capital punishment case must undertake a pretrial questionnaire about their opinions towards death sentencing so that in court the filtration process for picking a jury will be more efficient in creating a jury where a variety of opinions about capital punishment can be heard, and verdicts are not skewered in favor of a death sentence regardless of the evidence presented. Furthermore, during this filtration process, the court must also be vigilant in considering the demographics of prospective death-qualified jurors and ensure that the resulting jury is diverse in both beliefs and backgrounds.

Conclusion

Although there are informative benefits to the inclusion of expert input in jury decision-making, these benefits can be marred by its limitations arising from the subjectivity of expertise perception and evaluation. This essay has offered several solutions that aim to preserve the benefits of expert testimony whilst reducing the impact of its limitations. In summary, expert testimonies have a very important role to play in a juror’s evaluation of evidence, however, legal systems must be mindful that jurors may be unaware of how to asses evidence credibility and must be proactive in emphasizing objectivity and critical evaluation of evidence so that jurors are more capable of making educated and unbiased verdicts. Additionally, care must be taken by the court to safeguard against one-sided juries that are unrepresentative of the community.

The connection of how the mind ties into behavior has been studied for centuries with the help of psychology, but new aspects of it have helped the world with delving into specific minds, ones of the incarcerated, and how psychology involves the justice system. Forensic psychology is defined as the combination of using psychological theories and the legal system to help people who have come into contact with the law. These types of psychologists do more than just the regular study of behavior by applying it to law and how people react while in the justice system. This aspect of psychology has been growing throughout the years, but everyday people seem to mix up what the job is about and how forensic psychology helps the world. Certain skills are needed for this profession that a graduate psychologist could not do without extra knowledge. The work is extremely extensive and difficult but could be rewarding when successful in helping those who come across the law.

Since forensic psychology is a new, up-and-coming field of work, there are a lot of questions arising about the whole topic. People do not usually know what this subdiscipline of psychology is about and think of it as the TV show, Criminal Minds, but that is far from the truth. The most asked question about forensic psychology is, “what actually is the field about and what do you need to know to pursue it?” Forensic psychology requires the understanding of precise clinical assessment that includes documenting data with adequate detail that will allow for judgment in a court case when presented to others (American Psychologist). To be able to correctly conduct a clinical assessment, a person would need to know the research behind what is being assessed, along with the skills of communication. Without solid communication skills, discipline is almost impossible since talking with others is a necessary part of the job. After acquiring the needed knowledge and skill after years of studying, forensic psychology could help millions with tasks of interviewing already captured criminals, assisting in child custody placements, counseling the families involved in a case, and treatment plans for offenders. People wonder all the time how knowledge is gained in this field, and it includes hard work of knowing how to investigate and conduct consultations. This knowledge is only given by schooling beyond a bachelor’s degree and requires a master’s in psychology, a license to be able to counsel others, and a Ph.D./Psyd since psychologists cannot give guidance to others without these things provided. Forensic psychologists also need at least two years of experience from a credential internship (Varela & Conroy). Once certified, they are often highly valued in the psychology world and especially by others working in law as well.

This type of field cannot work without being highly trained since they specialize in a certain aspect. Forensic psychologists often succeed in the justice system, pertaining to courtrooms and also in counseling the families who are with the convicted or with the victim. The field has them conduct multiple assessments of offenders to look for psychological disorders and see if they are able to stand trial. They can also be called into court to testify about the information found and the mental state of who they are testifying for. Although forensic psychologists technically aren’t doctors, they are still required to know how to diagnose someone with a mental disorder and have learned how with their Ph.D. or PsyD or the assessment wouldn’t be clinical. Those without a clinical license or schooling in a Ph.D. of some sort aren’t allowed to conduct therapy or evaluations (Drogin).

Since forensic psychologists are looking into the minds of offenders, they need to know how to present the information given to the examinee and inform the offender of their rights (Varela & Conroy). Without informing the rights of someone who is being examined and having their information be said aloud in court, they could lose their license and credibility. This instance is exactly why having to get additional schooling is important. As well as working with offenders or the accused, forensic psychologists deal alongside families by giving them therapy sessions during a court case if needed as a third-party neutral role. They comfort families for therapeutic purposes, but also use the information gathered for research purposes and assist in future investigations to look for patterns (American Psychologist). These patterns could be of the offender, which includes their method of crime, why they did the crime, and what signs they showed before doing it. Not only during an open court case where a forensic psychologist is needed but also in prisons for those who are incarcerated. They aid in taking an evaluation of prisoners, seeing what their mental state is and how they can use this information while interviewing the incarcerated for active pursuits of offenders who have the same behavioral style.

After consulting with families, victims, or offenders, forensic psychologists use this information to inform the outside world. They take test results and common behaviors, especially from criminals, and give them out during a court case or to a local police force to try and educate others on what they should look for in the future. For example, evaluating an offender could tell a forensic psychologist what goes through their minds when they want to commit a crime and they use that information to let others know of warning signs they need to look out for in individuals who seem suspicious. The information collected in a clinical assessment also is distributed to schooling for research purposes and gives students who are pursuing the field a chance to see real evidence and provides them with experience

This is the final year of my psychology undergraduate program at the University of Roehampton. This course has given me the opportunity to expand my knowledge and delve deep into areas of psychology that require critical thinking and deep analysis. An example of an area in psychology that requires this is the forensic psychology module that I studied during my tenure at the university. This year-long module helped refine my skills as an aspiring psychologist giving me the ability to introspect and observe from different angles. The criminal and forensic psychology module was a catalyst in doing further research and studies on this topic leading me to ultimately choose it as a master’s degree. The mental motivation of criminals has intrigued me and given me an extra nudge to pursue forensic and criminal psychology as a master’s degree. Throughout my degree, I have strived to attain a deep understanding of psychology and how the mind works through a tunnel of perception in which I can better understand the various psychological differences that vary from person to person. This caught my attention when looking at forensic psychology and the aspect of criminals; what is the motivation that ensues such actions? Upon researching this topic I realized that the definition of forensic psychology is skewed by the influence of the media when in actuality forensic psychology is a branch of psychology that focuses on the assessment and treatment of specific individuals within a legal framework. I believe Glasgow Caledonian University is the right place for me to pursue my master’s in forensic psychology because of the amazing facilities and the high praise past students have associated with the university. The program of study delivered by Glasgow Caledonian University offers expertise within academia and the opportunity to work with active practitioners in order to gain knowledge on the application of both theoretical and conceptual frameworks within mental health and forensic and criminal psychology. The benefit of practical application will really enhance my knowledge and give me a deep understanding of the field. Learning from world-class researchers as well as active practitioners is essential to this field of psychology and the program offered by this university is a unique and accredited program that is top 5 percent in this field with cutting-edge research such as new developments of research within this field. Forensic psychology is a growing area of psychology and I hope to be part of this progressive discipline. This program is ideal due to its practicality and I believe it is a program of study that is engaging due to its utility in various methods of teaching.

Another motivation to study forensic psychology at a master’s level is the opportunity to have completed an accredited mental health first aid training remotely at the University of Roehampton, this four-day course was delivered by Mental health first aid (MHFA) England. The intent of this training is to equip individuals with the knowledge and skills to act as the first point of contact for individuals experiencing mental health concerns, by recognizing the signs and symptoms of common mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Mental health plays a significant role in forensic psychology due to its prevalence among offenders. This training was invaluable as it further developed my knowledge of mental health and whilst conversing with the delegates in my training group, I realized how prevalent mental health is and its manifestation in everyday life, and the impact it has on individuals. It is important to manage those with mental health concerns, especially among individuals in contact with the criminal justice system in order to reduce future criminality. During the mental health, and first aid training MHFA utilized an acronym which was ALGEE.

I started my professional career within the legal arena. I was a victim advocate for the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office and through my legal work, I realized that mental health and psychology are very much related to victim advocacy and other areas of law. After my work with the D.A.’s office, I sought out working in the mental health field due to the strong connection between the two. I worked in the mental health field in various positions and my work only made it more evident that trauma, coupled with a lack of knowledge and education is truly what causes most disparities in the legal and mental health field.

Presently, I am coming around full circle by obtaining my master’s degree in Forensic Psychology. Forensic psychology can be defined as the use of psychology within the legal field. The APA would define it as “the application of clinical psychology to the forensic setting” (Ward, 2013). Forensic psychology sparked my interest because I would be able to obtain a position that would be the best of both worlds. Part of the reason why I chose forensic psychology was due to the various areas that one would be able to work within the field. My goal is to be a forensic interviewer for children that have been molested or sexually abused.

Through my work with the D.A.’s office, I realized how victims and those in the legal system interact really makes an impact on the victim’s ability to process and cope with the ordeal. During the investigation phase, officers and detectives play a major role. Depending on credibility and cooperation with the investigation they could either be treated as a victim or as someone telling tales. This type of behavior may cause secondary trauma to victims, which in essence means that they relive the event. My goal is to work toward eliminating stigma and rape myths, advocate for victims and treat victims with respect during the legal process.

Through my coursework, I have learned that there are certain elements needed in order to be a professional in the field: definitions and terminology, research, citation, and the application of critical thinking skills. All of these are needed in order to be competent in the field of forensic psychology. These skills only strengthen my ability to be a professional.

The definition and terminology that was most thought-provoking were that of forensic psychology. Depending on the source, it may be defined as many things. As described above, it is the use of psychology in the legal setting, but it is so much more. It is a subspeciality in psychology that has a very recent history in comparison to its other counterparts. Knowing the correct definitions and terms for the field is important in order to effectively communicate concepts and methodologies. Knowledge of terms and definitions makes it easier to understand theories, which in turn provides a close relationship with research.

Another important takeaway from this course is the importance of research. The purpose of research is to better understand ideas, events, and concepts within the field by compiling information on the subject matter, analyzing its importance, and thinking critically to apply the research to context. Research is impactful because it makes it possible for practitioners in the field to improve practices based on new innovations and improve disparities in preexisting modalities.

Once the research is complete practitioners need to cite their sources. Citation is so important because it assists in avoiding plagiarism, makes information easy to identify, and is ethical when referencing others’ works. The most practical style of citation for forensic psychologists is APA. Utilizing the APA’s style of citation is necessary because it is the very association that set the guidelines for practitioners of the psychological field. APA citation aids in the writer providing clear and effective communication by providing a standardized format for citation that keeps the writer organized and efficient. Paraphrasing is key when citing. The proper citation gives the writer credibility and that is essential for colleagues to recognize other practitioners’ efforts within the field.

The last element is the application of critical thinking skills. Critical thinking is crucial because it enhances understanding of information by improving comprehension and displays your personal analysis of concepts. Integrating the concepts learned, then applying critical thinking displays the comprehension of the material. Critical thinking is useful for problem-solving due to using logical and deductive reasoning to come up with solutions.

These learned concepts and skills add to my being a professional in the field. Professionalism is behavior that conveys an individual’s ethics, knowledge, competence, responsibility, skills, and motivation to succeed in their given field. It is needed in order for employers, colleagues, and others in the field to know that an individual has integrity and is credible. It is essential for a professional to identify and present their best qualities as strengths.

My personal strengths that will assist me as a graduate student are effective communication, motivation, and a strong work ethic. These strengths are crucial in being able to complete this master’s program, in addition to what is needed to be a professional. Effective communication can be both oral and written. It is beneficial in all areas of life. Without effective communication, one would not be able to clearly express themselves. It aids in others being able to understand what is being said and is a building block in creating and maintaining healthy relationships, professional or otherwise. Effective communication is not what one says, but the manner in which one says it. To communicate is to provide information, but effective communication is more than that. It enhances the quality of the message and the chances that the audience will comprehend the information in a thorough manner.

Motivation is another strength that will make it possible for me to complete graduate school. Motivation is the drive and focus needed to read journal articles, complete writing assignments, and think critically to apply the information in this and other courses to my profession. Motivation takes persistence because not only does one need to be motivated, but one needs to be able to maintain that motivation throughout their academic career in order to complete their degree.

The final element of personal strength is a strong work ethic.

Lockdown by Walter Dean Myers is a novel narrated by incarcerated teen, 14-year-old Maurice “Reese” Anderson. The novel begins with Reese detailing his experience in juvenile detention after 22 months of imprisonment, his sentence for stealing a prescription pad from a local doctor’s office, and selling them to his neighborhood drug dealer. However, Reese is comprised of more than the person his crimes suggest; he is smart, compassionate, and devoted to those he considers his family. This essay will summarize the events of the novel and examine their relevance to the course: Forensic Psychology Theory and Practice, analyze an interesting character from the novel and lastly, relate concepts from Juvenile Delinquency, 10th ed. (Bartollas, Schmaller, & Turner, 2019) to the novel.

The novel begins with what appears to be a chance for Reese to prove himself. Reese, out of all the inmates, is allowed to participate in a work-release program where he aids in taking care of the residents in a nursing home facility, called Evergreen. There, he meets Mr. Hooft, a prejudiced and ornery old man that exhibits disdain for him. At the juvenile detention center, Reese typically attempts to avoid conflict, but when Deepak “Toon”, a 12-year-old inmate is set to be jumped into the prison gang, 3-5-7, Reese feels a need to protect him but worries that his interference will mar his good record. Because Toon cries during his beating, he has failed his initiation and his bullies, Cobo and Diego decide to kill him. Reese’s protective nature prompts him to engage in fighting behavior with Toon’s aggressors. This fight puts his participation in the work-release program in jeopardy but he luckily does not lose his placement and his ability to continue at Evergreen. At Evergreen, Mr. Hooft slowly begins opening up to him about his childhood as a prisoner of war in a Japanese war camp. At the detention center, Reese is once again induced to fight, this time he fights with Tarik or “King Kong”, a new inmate. King Kong repeatedly tries and succeeds in coaxing Reese into fighting with him. Their altercation leads to each of them being placed in solitary confinement for five days, a particularly insufferable punishment for Reese. Again, his fighting puts his only form of reprieve for the detention and source of social interaction with the world–the work release program at Evergreen–at risk of being withdrawn. He despairs, but at the end of his confinement, he is told that he can still work at the nursing home facility. At the pinnacle of the story, Reese is taken from the detention center to a precinct where he is told that he would be charged with murder and is facing up to 20 years. The investigators believe that in his initial crime, Reese stole drugs in addition to the prescription pads, and these drugs resulted in someone overdosing and dying. Reese must consider taking a plea deal of 3 years, or facing trial and wagering the next 20 years of his life. After his time in isolation, Reese makes a realization that he must take an active role in bettering his life and reforming his actions so that he can sustain a life outside of incarceration. Fortunately for Reese, the police drop the murder investigation, but Reese does not receive the early release he had hoped for and must remain at Progress for another four months. One year after he is released, Reese has managed to avoid delinquency and continue working at Evergreen. From here, Reese can hopefully realize his goals and sustain a life outside of criminality.

The overall depiction of juvenile delinquency is relevant to the understanding and application of this course. Forensic psychology is a specialization of psychology, requiring expertise within the judicial system, which mainly focuses on the psychological issues faced by the people within the judicial system (i.e. suspects, defendants, and convicted criminals.) In other words, forensic psychology handles the psychology of the people affected by the justice system. Reese, as well as all of the delinquents in the story, have personalities and experiences similar to the adolescents we will encounter in the practicum section of this course. This book accurately expounds on the psychological effects of the legal system and the role it plays in society. From the opening words of the novel, the reader can observe that these juvenile delinquents are viewed as a disposable part of society: “I hope you mess up! I hope you blow it big time! (Myers, pg. 1)” The condescension in this line reveals that these juveniles know and live in a system that not only expects the worst from you but has the fortitude to inveigle and perpetuate that negative behavior. Lockdown invokes feelings of sympathy and empathy for these characters, tools that will be beneficial in the application of this course. It highlights the necessity of giving second chances and will influence what we think of the kids we will interact with. Additionally, the novel exposes the complexity of the character. John Galsworthy asserted that “a man is a sum of his actions, of what he has done, of what he can do, nothing else.” Contrarily, Lockdown shows the reader that people are not just the sum of their actions. Myers shows us that these teens are multidimensional beings that experience cognitive dissonance but may not always do the right thing. The novel shows us that by not treating juvenile delinquents based on their crime and believing in them we can spur a change in them that can propel them to lead better lives.

Our protagonist, Reese is, to me, one of the more interesting and complex characters in the novel. Reese is an African American and one of the first concepts the reader observes is Reese’s awareness of race and how his race affects his role in society and the juvenile detention center. At the nursing home facility of the work-release program, he notices that “it looked like all the help at Evergreen were colored and the residents were white (Myers, 52).” He perceives a distorted system through which he identifies himself with those that remain on the subjugated side of this system. When Reese meets Mr. Hooft, he is further reminded of the prejudice held by the dominant society. Mr. Hooft, a Danish white man, is adamant that Reese is the summation of his crimes and an unworthy human being simply because of the color of his skin. Reese understands that being black and a delinquent only further ostracizes him from the benefits of society. Later, Mr. Hooft can recognize the similarity between his childhood and Reese’s life in that both of them lacked control over the entities that oppress them: the imprisoning Japanese army and the structure of systemic racism in America. Reese’s race not only influenced how he was treated in the world, but it also plays an immense role in the conditions of his incarceration and release. Unlike the other minority inmates at Progress, Reese is the only one allowed to participate in the work-release program because of his high IQ, and because he had not committed anything violent. However, Reese’s potential as a young black teen made him a target for other people, especially other African Americans to try to pull him down. “They know it and every time they see somebody who might break the cycle and do something with his life, they want to pull him back in. Especially if you look like them (Myers, 141).” This is known as the ‘crabs-in-a-barrel’ mentality, the idea that people that belong to the same group might sabotage one another’s success. Reese acknowledges this and endeavors not to allow himself to be pulled away from his purpose by other people.

Reese’s character is complex because of his strong level of compassion and commitment to those who he deems family. The fights that Reese gets in are not only because of the system and other actors that attempt to goad him into violence but rather they are also resultant of his inability to fully control himself. That could be a consequence of his upbringing with his physically abusive father and drug-addicted mother or just an outcome of a lack of awareness present in adolescence. Nonetheless, Reese does have some culpability in his actions and he allows his empathy to decide how he behaves. Reese conveys that he sees himself in Toon, a helpless younger inmate, and reasons why he is protective of him. “There were minutes when I thought me and Toon were the same person. I was on the outside, dark, and ready with my fists if anything went down, and Toon was me on the inside, always a little nervous, always looking around to see what was going to happen to him (Myers, 24).”This connection to Toon prompts Reese to twice risk his discipline record and his ability to be released to defend Toon. This selflessness is unlike the other inmate characters in the novel and is also displayed in his relationship with his 9-year-old sister, Icy. Her goal, to go to college and become a lawyer or teacher, becomes his reason to survive the detention. Admirably, he plans to get out and work to pay her way through college, which prompts him to maintain behavior that would get him out of Progress.

Many concepts from Juvenile Delinquency, 10th ed. (Bartollas, Schmaller, & Turner, 2019) relate to the novel. The first relevant concept is strain theory. Strain theory proposes that the frustrations individuals feel when they are unable to achieve the goals they desire can result in juvenile delinquency. Robert K. Merton, one of the most influential strain theorists emphasized two components of strain theory: culturally defined goals and institutional means. Culturally defined goals are the set of purposes and interests a society defines as reasonable goals for individuals. Institutional means are the culturally-approved methods of obtaining those goals. According to the theory, when a culture has a goal for which there are no legitimate ways to attain it, the culture lacks integration, and a state of normlessness, or anomie occurs. The disconnection between society and possibilities creates intense pressure for deviance; this pressure is referred to as a strain. A key factor in strain theory is the idea of blocked opportunity, the limited or nonexistent chance of success. In Lockdown, Reese’s initial crime resulted in his being sentenced to juvenile detention was the result of personal strain. Reese describes himself as “need[ing] money real bad (Myers, 59),” Reese shares that his “father didn’t have anything. Willis [his brother] didn’t have anything, [and his] mom was checking out the world to see what she could snatch off.” In other words, he engaged in his delinquent behavior to resolve the strain he felt and to achieve monetary goals. The second relevant concept present in the novel is social process theories. These theories contend that criminal behavior is learned through interactions with others and that socialization processes occur as the result of a group membership. According to Bartollas et al., adolescents are influenced by their family, school experience, and their peers. Reese’s delinquency could be attributed to their parents’ illegal activity and the presence of violence in the home, his brother’s antisocial behavior as well as the socialization of his friend, Kenneth “K-man” Bramble’s behavior. Reese expresses his neighborhood’s lack of institutionalized means and the temptation of delinquency. “Just the way King Kong was messing with me, I knew the streets were waiting to mess with me. All my homies hanging out and dealing whatever they had were waiting, all the suckers leaning against the rail on the corner and looking to see who was weak were waiting, and all the gangbangers with nothing to do but cook up some mad were waiting (Myers, 83).” Because of this, Reese fears going back home. He knows that socializing with those people will influence him into criminality. The novel highlights that the weight of the influence of social actors in society contributes to instances of youth delinquency. The third relevant concept alluded to in the novel is resiliency. Resiliency is an individual’s “capacity to regain personal power and develop a strong sense of self in the face of poverty, severe family hardship, and community devastation (Bartollas, Schmaller, & Turner, 2019.” Throughout the novel, Reese strives to attain resiliency. Facing many hardships, poverty, familial instability, and lockup, Reese desires to start over and “invent something, look around, and figure out some way to survive that’s not going to get [him] killed or back in the jail system (Myers, 236).’ This understanding of resiliency is what ultimately allows him to stay the course and realize his hopes and desires.

Conclusively, Lockdown provides a cohesive understanding of juvenile delinquency. Through Reese’s experiences, the reader comes to understand the structure of the juvenile system as well as hear the voices of those directly affected by judicial decisions. The novel compels the reader to empathize with the characters and to see them as more than just their crimes. It revealed interactions that were beneficial to the growth of the adolescents as well as exposed the realities of treatment that are antithetical to progress. Forensic Psychology encompasses all of the components of the judicial system and Lockdown highlights the concepts involved and their implications.