JAAPL
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 35:1:34-43 (2007)
Copyright © 2007 by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mossman, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mossman, D.

REGULAR ARTICLE

Predicting Restorability of Incompetent Criminal Defendants

Douglas Mossman, MD

Dr. Mossman is Professor and Director, Division of Forensic Psychiatry, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton, OH, and Administrative Director, Glenn M. Weaver Institute of Law and Psychiatry, University of Cincinnati College of Law, Cincinnati, OH. Address correspondence to: Douglas Mossman, MD, East Medical Plaza, First Floor, 627 S. Edwin C. Moses Boulevard, Dayton, OH 45408-1461. E-mail: douglas.mossman{at}wright.edu

U.S. courts frequently require forensic examiners to offer opinions concerning the likelihood that criminal defendants found incompetent to stand trial can have their competence "restored" through treatment. Yet no jurisdiction has established legal guidelines for testimony concerning restorability, and several authors have suggested that mental health professionals cannot accurately predict whether treatment to restore competence will succeed. This study asked whether reliable information that is consistently available at the time of examination might support empirically grounded opinions about the likelihood of restoration. Using records from all 351 inpatient pretrial defendants who underwent competence restoration at a state psychiatric hospital from 1995 through 1999, I evaluated whether several types of information that are reliable and that could consistently be made available to forensic examiners—including evaluees’ demographic characteristics, diagnoses, symptom patterns, criminal charges, number of prior public sector hospitalizations, and cumulative prior length of stay (LOS)—would predict outcome of restoration efforts. I modeled the probability of successful restoration using logistic regression equations, and evaluated the equations’ predictive accuracy using k-fold cross-validation and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Lower probability of restoration was associated with having a misdemeanor charge, longer cumulative LOS, older age, and diagnoses of mental retardation, schizophrenia, and schizoaffective disorder. Although the overall rate of successful restoration for felony defendants was 75 percent, logistic equations allowed selection of subgroups with high predicted probabilities of restoration (>90%) and low probabilities of restoration (<35%). In cross-validation simulations, predictive equations had ROC areas of 0.727 for all defendants, and 0.735 for felony defendants. These findings provide scientific support for testimony that two types of incompetent evaluees have well-below-average probabilities of being restored: chronically psychotic defendants with histories of lengthy inpatient hospitalizations and defendants whose incompetence stems from irremediable cognitive disorders (such as mental retardation). Nonetheless, courts may still deem low probabilities of success to be "substantial" enough to warrant attempts at restoration.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Acad Psychiatry LawHome page
D. R. Morris and G. F. Parker
Jackson's Indiana: State Hospital Competence Restoration in Indiana
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, December 1, 2008; 36(4): 522 - 534.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Acad Psychiatry LawHome page
D. Mossman, S. G. Noffsinger, P. Ash, R. L. Frierson, J. Gerbasi, M. Hackett, C. F. Lewis, D. A. Pinals, C. L. Scott, K. G. Sieg, et al.
AAPL Practice Guideline for the Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation of Competence to Stand Trial
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, December 1, 2007; 35(Supplement_4): S3 - S72.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Acad Psychiatry LawHome page
H. Wortzel, I. A. Binswanger, R. Martinez, C. M. Filley, and C. A. Anderson
Crisis in the Treatment of Incompetence to Proceed to Trial: Harbinger of a Systemic Illness
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, September 1, 2007; 35(3): 357 - 363.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Acad Psychiatry LawHome page
G. B. Leong
Commentary: Restorability of Incompetence to Stand Trial--Implications Beyond Predictive Equations
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law, March 1, 2007; 35(1): 44 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.