Abstract
With the return of capital punishment, and with all states adopting separate sentencing hearings after conviction, psychiatric participation in such hearings has become one of the most controversial areas in forensic psychiatry. While such participation is not ethically prohibited per se, perhaps the majority of psychiatrists have significant qualms about being included in such hearings, particularly in the realm of prediction of dangerousness. Under such circumstances, prosecutors have had some difficulty in obtaining opinions. This article discusses one attempt to force evaluators to perform such evaluations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.