In this article, Judit Bembribe shows the nature of some difficulties that psychologists face when they have to make an expert report. These are the main two problems:
- The impossibility of an independent psychological evaluation of the legal fact (tha "accused" can't be seen in a different way, the are "pre-judged")
- The confussion in the idea of subject that both disciplines (pshycology and law) have.
Another central topic is the following hypothesis: Psychology provides theoretical elements to control the individuals, with the negative consecuences that it entails (the human labeling).
It's an interesting paper, that shows the biggest ethical problem of my discipline, wich many psychologists ignore...
1 comment:
a bit telegraphic in style, too short!!
In this article, Judit Bembribe shows the nature of some difficulties that psychologists face when they have to make an expert report. These are the main two problems:
- The impossibility of an independent psychological evaluation of the legal fact (the "accused" can't be seen in a different way, the are "pre-judged")
- The CONFUSION in the idea of subject that both disciplines (PSYCHOLOGY and law) have.
Another central topic is the following hypothesis: Psychology provides theoretical elements to control the individuals; with the negative CONSEQUENCES that it entails (the human labeling).
It's an interesting paper, that shows the biggest ethical problem of my discipline, WHICH many psychologists ignore...
Post a Comment