Forensic Neurology and the Role of Neurologists in Forensic Evaluations.

Forensic psychiatrists may be asked to opine on neurological evidence or neurological diseases outside the scope of their expertise. This article discusses the value of involving experts trained in behavioral neurology in such cases. First, we describe the field of behavioral neurology and neuropsychiatry, the subspecialty available to both neurologists and psychiatrists focused on the behavioral, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric manifestations of neurological diseases. Next, we discuss the added value of behavioral neurologists in forensic cases, including assisting in the diagnostic evaluation for complex neuropsychiatric diseases, using expertise in localization to provide a strong scientific basis for linking neurodiagnostic testing to relevant neuropsychiatric symptoms, and assisting in relating these symptoms to the relevant legal question in cases where such symptoms may be less familiar to forensic psychiatrists, such as frontal lobe syndromes. We discuss approaches to integrating behavioral neurology with forensic psychiatry, highlighting the need for collaboration and mentorship between disciplines. Finally, we discuss several forensic cases highlighting the additional value of experts trained in behavioral neurology. We conclude that forensic psychiatrists should involve behavioral neurology experts when encountering neurological evidence that falls outside their scope of expertise, and the need for further cross-disciplinary collaboration and training.

Forensic Neurology: Practice Considerations and Training Opportunities.

Neurologic evidence, including MRI, PET, and EEG, has been introduced in more than 2,800 criminal cases in the past decade, including 12% of all murder trials and 25% of death penalty trials, to argue whether neurologic diseases are present, contribute to criminal behavior, and ultimately whether the defendant is less criminally responsible, competent to stand trial, or should receive a reduced punishment for his or her crime. Unfortunately, neurologists are often not involved in these criminal cases despite being the medical specialty with the most relevant training and expertise to address these issues for the court. Reasons for the absence of neurologists in criminal cases include a lack of awareness from lawyers, judges, and other expert witnesses on the value of including neurologists in forensic evaluations, and the lack of experience, training, and willingness of neurologists to work as expert witnesses in criminal cases. Here, we discuss forensic neurology, a field bridging the gap between neurology, neuroscience, and the law. We discuss the process of performing forensic evaluations, including answering 3 fundamental questions: the neurologic diagnostic question, the behavioral neurology/neuropsychiatry question, and the forensic neurology question. We discuss practical aspects of performing forensic expert witness work and important ethical differences between the neurologist's role in treatment vs forensic settings. Finally, we discuss the currently available pathways for interested neurologists to receive additional training in forensic assessments.

From posts to protection: Ethical considerations regarding forensic psychiatrists and a duty to warn based on social media.

Increasing use of social media in forensic mental health evaluations will lead to new challenges that must be resolved by forensic practitioners and the legal system. One such dilemma is the discovery of information that would typically trigger a legal duty and professional ethics obligation for mental health professionals to breach doctor-patient confidentiality to promote public safety and prevent harm to vulnerable third parties. Although the law and professional organizations offer clear guidance for practitioners in the treatment role, there is currently no clarity from the law or instruction from professional organizations on what mental health professionals should do if they discover such information during a confidential forensic evaluation. For example, a forensic evaluator may find evidence on social media of an evaluee's threats to seriously harm others, abuse of children and the elderly, or severely impaired driving. There are no clear guidelines for how a forensic psychiatrist should respond in these complicated situations. We review the legal concepts and historical evolution of confidentiality, privilege, and mandated reporter duties that forensic practitioners should consider in these legally ambiguous situations. Finally, we discuss ethics frameworks practitioners can implement to determine their most ethical course of action when faced with such dilemmas.

Forensic neurology: a distinct subspecialty at the intersection of neurology, neuroscience and law.

Neurological evidence is increasingly used in criminal cases to argue that a defendant is less responsible for their behaviour, is not competent to stand trial or should receive a reduced punishment for the crime. Unfortunately, neurologists are rarely involved in such cases despite having the expertise to help to inform these decisions in court. In this Perspective, we advocate for the development of 'forensic neurology', a subspecialty of neurology focused on using neurological clinical and scientific expertise to address legal questions for the criminal justice system. We review literature suggesting that the incidence of criminal behaviour is higher in people with certain neurological disorders than the general public and that undiagnosed neurological abnormalities are common in people who commit crimes. We discuss the need for forensic neurologists in criminal cases to provide an opinion on what neurological diagnoses are present, the resulting symptoms and ultimately whether the symptoms affect legal determinations such as criminal responsibility or competency.

Voluntary intoxication, homicide, and mens rea: Past, present, and future.

Voluntary, or intentional, acute intoxication does not qualify for an insanity defense. However, in many jurisdictions, voluntary intoxication can create a diminished capacity to form a specific intent necessary for a criminal offense. This is a type of mens rea defense. Homicide provides a clear example where the absence of a required specific intent can lead to a lesser included crime that does not require that specific intent. Thereby, a mens rea defense may lessen a first-degree murder charge to a lesser degree or even manslaughter, depending on the jurisdiction. After reviewing the history of mens rea defenses and voluntary intoxication, we performed a search of LexisNexis for state statutes and case law regulating the use of voluntary intoxication in mens rea defenses, focusing on homicide-related offenses. In this article, we compare the different approaches that have developed to address this complex issue. We discuss why knowledge of these different approaches is essential to the practicing forensic examiner in relevant jurisdictions and explore developing issues in the area.