NCJ Number
194634
Journal
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Volume: 30 Issue: 1 Dated: 2002 Pages: 65-69
Date Published
2002
Length
5 pages
Annotation
This article reports on the ethical problem of countertransference to the novice forensic psychiatrist. The authors discuss a case study in order to show the pervasiveness of countertransference in the evaluation of patients who have been accused of crimes.
Abstract
This article reports on a case study involving a 19-year-old male patient who is accused of trying to strangle his one-year-old son. The case is meant to illustrate the fact that novice forensic psychiatrists must be vigilant in recognizing and overcoming the problem of countertransference when evaluating patients. The authors define countertransference as an unconscious reaction to the patient under evaluation. These reactions may influence the forensic psychiatrist's diagnosis of the patient, thus presenting the ethical dilemma of a possible misdiagnosis. Misdiagnosing a patient is especially troublesome in the field of forensic psychiatry because of the considerable influence these psychiatrists have over the administration of justice. In the case under consideration, the novice forensic psychiatrist assigned to evaluate and diagnose the 19-year-old male patient had reactions to the fact that the patient tried to strangle his own son. The forensic psychiatrist also had a young child and felt strongly that the patient should be punished for what he had done. Having such feelings about the patient's crime clouded the psychiatrist's objectivity in the case, thus illustrating the ethical problems presented by countertransference when it is left unchecked. The authors conclude that feelings of countertransference can and should be decreased by forensic psychiatrists in order to ethically and objectively carrying out their duties to accurately evaluate and diagnosis their patients.