Shiina A, Tomoto A, Omiya S, Sato A, Iyo M, Igarashi Y. Differences between British and Japanese perspectives on forensic mental health systems: A preliminary study.
World J Psychiatry 2017;
7:8-11. [PMID:
28401045 PMCID:
PMC5371174 DOI:
10.5498/wjp.v7.i1.8]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2016] [Revised: 09/23/2016] [Accepted: 11/22/2016] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM
To clarify the differences in views on forensic mental health (FMH) systems between the United Kingdom and Japan.
METHODS
We conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with six leading forensic psychiatrists. Based on a discussion by the research team, we created an interview form. After we finished conducting all the interviews, we qualitatively analyzed their content.
RESULTS
In the United Kingdom the core domain of FMH was risk assessment and management; however, in Japan, the core domain of FMH was psychiatric testimony. In the United Kingdom, forensic psychiatrists were responsible for ensuring public safety, and psychopathy was identified as a disease but deemed as not suitable for medical treatment. On the other hand, in Japan, psychopathy was not considered a mental illness.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, there are considerable differences between the United Kingdom and Japan with regard to the concepts of FMH. Some ideas taken from both cultures for better FMH practice were suggested.
Collapse