Allan A. (2018).
Psychiatry, psychology, and law:
an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and
New Zealand Association of Psychiatry,
Psychology and Law, 25(3), 485–499.
Abstract
States have an obligation to protect themselves and their citizens from harm, and they use the coercive powers of law to investigate threats, enforce rules and arbitrate disputes, thereby impacting on people's well-being and legal rights and privileges. Psychologists as a collective have a responsibility to use their abilities, knowledge, skill and experience to enhance law's effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability in preventing harm, but their professional behaviour in this collaboration must be moral. They could, however, find their personal values to be inappropriate or there to be insufficient moral guides and could find it difficult to obtain definitive moral guidance from law. The profession's ethical principles do, however, provide well-articulated, generally accepted and profession-appropriate guidance, but practitioners might encounter moral issues that can only be solved by the profession as a whole or society.
Here are some thoughts:
While psychologists play a crucial role in assisting the law to protect society through assessments, risk evaluations, and expert opinions, their work often intersects with coercive practices that can impact individual rights and well-being. Psychologists must navigate the tension between societal protection and respect for human dignity, especially when involved in involuntary detention, forensic interviews, and risk assessments. They are guided by core ethical principles such as non-maleficence, justice, fidelity, and respect, but these principles can conflict, requiring careful ethical decision-making. Challenges are particularly pronounced in areas like risk assessment, where tools may be flawed or culturally biased, and where psychologists might face pressure to align with legal expectations, potentially compromising their objectivity and professional integrity.
The article emphasizes the need for psychologists in legal settings to maintain public trust, uphold human rights principles, and utilize structured, evidence-based, and culturally sensitive methods in their practice. Beyond individual ethical conduct, psychologists have a responsibility to advocate for systemic improvements, including better assessment tools for diverse populations and robust ethical guidelines. Ultimately, the article underscores that psychologists in law must continually engage in moral reflection, striving for a just and effective legal system while minimizing harm and ensuring their practice remains ethically sound and socially responsible, guided by both professional ethics and universal human rights frameworks.
