86例司法精神医学鉴定案例的专家复鉴分析

发布时间：2018-07-11 14:40

本文选题：司法鉴定 + 专家委员会　；参考：《上海精神医学》2000年01期

【摘要】：目的通过对司法精神医学专家委员会(专委会)鉴定案例的总结来分析司法精神医学鉴定中可能出现的各种偏差及其原因。方法收集86例专委会鉴定案例的社会人口学、病史以及各次鉴定资料;先以提请专委会鉴定原因分组对有关资料进行对照分析,然后对各次鉴定之间的一致性进行检验。结果提请专委会鉴定的案例在案型、鉴定诊断上有一定的特殊性,被鉴定人既往有违法肇祸史者较易提请专委会鉴定;初次鉴定与他处复鉴之间无论在精神症状检查、鉴定诊断还是法定能力评定方面,一致性均较差;他处复鉴与专委会复鉴之间则一致性较高。结论司法精神医学鉴定由于种种因素的制约而可能出现较大的偏差,除了各鉴定机构应大力提高业务水平外,专委会鉴定
[Abstract]:Objective to analyze the possible deviations and their causes in forensic psychiatry by summing up the cases of judicial psychiatry expert committee. Methods the social demography, medical history and identification data of 86 cases were collected, and the data were compared and analyzed by the reason group, and then the consistency of each appraisal was tested. Results the cases submitted to the Panel for appraisal have a certain particularity in the diagnosis, and it is easier for those who have had a history of past crimes against the law to apply to the expert Committee for appraisal. No matter between the initial appraisal and the re-examination elsewhere, there is no matter whether there is a mental symptom examination, The consistency of identification diagnosis and legal ability assessment is poor, while the consistency between the other part and the panel is higher. Conclusion there may be a great deviation in forensic psychiatric expertise due to various factors. In addition to the professional level that should be greatly improved by all the appraisal institutions, the expert Committee should make great efforts to improve the expertise of the expert Committee.
【作者单位】：上海市精神卫生中心上海市精神卫生中心上海市精神卫生中心上海市精神卫生中心
【分类号】：D919

【参考文献】