HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Prentky, R. A. Articles by Gabriel, A. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Prentky, R. A. Articles by Gabriel, A. M.

Commentary: Muddy Diagnostic Waters in the SVP Courtroom

Dr. Prentky is Director, MA Program in Forensic Psychology, and Ms. Coward and Ms. Gabriel are doctoral students in the School of Psychology, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ. Address correspondence to: Robert A. Prentky, PhD, School of Psychology, Fairleigh Dickinson University, 1000 River Road, Teaneck, NJ 07666. E-mail: rprentky{at}fdu.edu

In this brief commentary, we address several of the points raised by Drs. First and Halon on the abuses of DSM diagnoses (APA, 2000) in civil commitment hearings of sex offenders. We discuss each of the elements in the three-step process proposed by First and Halon for reforming the diagnosis of paraphilias in SVP proceedings, paying particular attention to the role of volitional impairment. Both in spirit and in substance, we fundamentally agree with First and Halon, concluding that the misuse of science, inclusive of the misuse of the DSM, in the SVP courtroom is a variation of pretextuality. We commend First and Halon for drawing attention to a serious problem, one that undermines the integrity of the legal system in general and the SVP adjudicatory process in particular. We conclude with a warning that without firmer control from the courts, expert opinions will remain opaque and of questionable probative value.