CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Holoyda BJ. Behav. Sci. Law 2020; ePub(ePub): ePub. |
|
Affiliation |
Forensic Psychiatrist, Las Vegas, NV, USA. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2020, John Wiley and Sons) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
32022333 |
|
Abstract |
Following the advent of sexually violent predator (SVP) legislation in the early 1990s, forensic evaluators began to apply diagnostic labels related to a paraphilic interest in rape as a mental condition predisposing individuals convicted of sexual offenses to recidivate. The most recent iteration of the concept, other specified paraphilic disorder (non-consent) (OSPD (non-consent)), is a commonly utilized diagnostic entity in SVP proceedings. Research on paraphilic interest in coercive sex has failed to define a valid methodology or set of criteria to make a diagnosis of OSPD (non-consent) and has repeatedly demonstrated that the diagnostic construct has poor interrater reliability. The state of the science pertaining to OSPD (non-consent) thus raises serious concerns regarding its admissibility in SVP proceedings. Indeed, there are recent cases in which courts have deemed it inadmissible. The forensic expert involved in SVP proceedings should understand admissibility concerns related to OSPD (non-consent) and how to address them in court. Language: en |