THE VALUE OF A CONCEPTUAL MODEL
A primary contribution of the first edition of EC was the description of a conceptual model for structuring our thinking about legal competencies. The purpose of the model was to assist the field in overcoming the limitations and criticisms that we have just reviewed.
The model was intended to frame and clarify our thinking about:• what the law wants to know when it asks legal competence questions;
• what should be required of clinicians' evaluations for legal competencies; and
• what research is needed in order to assist clinicians in obtaining reliable data and making relevant interpretations pertaining to legal competencies.
EC's conceptual model appears to have had a significant impact on developments in the field of assessments for legal competencies in subsequent years, both in terms of research and the way that the assessment process has come to be described in texts that guide the field of forensic assessment. It is again offered in Chapters 2 and 3 of this book, with some modifications suggested by experience in using it during the past 15 years.
Two premises originally influenced the development of the model.
• A conceptual model for assessments related to legal competencies must be based at the outset on an analysis of the law's view of competencies.
• The model must be consistent with, and must promote, the scientific, empirical and ethical standards of mental health professionals' disciplines.
The intention to develop assessments based on an analysis of the law's view of legal competencies does not concede that the law "knows more" about human capacities than do mental health professionals. To the contrary, assessments should make use of the special expertise of mental health professionals that qualifies them to enlighten legal decision makers. Their disciplines have developed many concepts, theories, and methods that can assist the courts.
Yet these must be selected and used in accordance with the structures of the law and its standards for decision making. Therefore, an assessment model for legal competencies should reflect, not reform, the law's model for addressing legal competencies.The intention to develop a conceptual model that is consistent with the scientific, empirical, and ethical standards of mental health professionals' disciplines is essential, because these are the standards that define mental health professionals' expertise in the courtroom. Theory, too, is essential; yet the use of theory alone does not distinguish the expertise of the scientist from that of the philosopher, theologian, or astrologer. The distinguishing characteristic is the essential requirement for empirical evidence to support the utility of the psychological theories that the scientist uses. A conceptual model for assessments must promote this empirical requirement in three ways: it must guide the collection of reliable case data, the use of empirical research results to interpret the data, and the development of new research to improve both methods and interpretations.
Chapters 2 and 3 describe the conceptual model for legal competence assessments that can meet these demands. The final section of Chapter 3 introduces Chapters 4 through 9, each of which describes the development and use of special assessment instruments that can assist in implementation of the conceptual approach. Chapter 10 summarizes the directions that should be taken in the future development and application of these instruments.