摘要
目的 通过对司法精神医学专家委员会(专委会)鉴定案例的总结来分析司法精神医学鉴定中可能出现的各种偏差及其原因。方法 收集86例专委会鉴定案例的社会人口学、病史以及各次鉴定资料;先以提请专委会鉴定原因分组对有关资料进行对照分析,然后对各次鉴定之间的一致性进行检验。结果 提请专委会鉴定的案例在案型、鉴定诊断上有一定的特殊性,被鉴定人既往有违法肇祸史者较易提请专委会鉴定;初次鉴定与他处复鉴之间无论在精神症状检查、鉴定诊断还是法定能力评定方面,一致性均较差;他处复鉴与专委会复鉴之间则一致性较高。结论 司法精神医学鉴定由于种种因素的制约而可能出现较大的偏差,除了各鉴定机构应大力提高业务水平外,专委会鉴定的方式目前仍不失为一种有效的消除分歧、解决疑难问题的手段。
Objective: To analyze potential deviations or errors in forensic psychiatric expertise.Method: Socio-epidcmiological, historical and forensic data of 86 re-assessed cases were collected through case-review and investigation. Comparative analyses were used to determine the differences between groups with various applying causes. Consistencies of recognition of mental symptoms, diagnoses and legal capacities were also examined between Expert Committee of Forensic Psychiatric Expertise (ECFPE) and other expertise institutes. Results: There are special offending types and diagnoses,in reassessed cases. Significant consistencies existed between previous and reassessed expertise in the rating of mental symptoms, diagnosis making and legal capacity conclusion. Conclusion: ECFPE may be an effective way to resolve deviations and difficulties in forensic psychiatric expertise.
出处
《上海精神医学》
2000年第1期20-23,共4页
Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry
