A Winning Case? Assessing the Effectiveness of a Mock Trial in a General Psychiatry Residency Program

There is only one published study about the effectiveness of mock trial activities within psychiatry residency education, which showed that a forensic lecture series culminating in a mock trial led to improvement in residents’ scores on a knowledge-based exam on family law [10]. The Center for Perin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Academic psychiatry 2019-10, Vol.43 (5), p.538-541
Main Authors: Baker, Sarah E., Ogundipe, Kehinde, Sterwald, Christopher, Van Enkevort, Erin A., Brenner, Adam
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Behavioral Objectives
Court hearings & proceedings
Curriculum
Didacticism
District attorneys
Drug administration
Educational objectives
Emergency medical care
Evidence
Feature: Educational Case Report
Feedback
Forensic Medicine - education
Forensic psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry - education
Gynecology
Humans
Internship and Residency
Judges
Law Related Education
Lawyers
Lecture Method
Medical Education
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Mental Health
Mental health care
Obstetrics
Participation
Persuasive Discourse
Psychiatrists
Psychiatry
Psychiatry - education
Roles
Seminars
Skills
Trials
Vignettes
Witnesses
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There is only one published study about the effectiveness of mock trial activities within psychiatry residency education, which showed that a forensic lecture series culminating in a mock trial led to improvement in residents’ scores on a knowledge-based exam on family law [10]. The Center for Perinatal Medicine and the Law at the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine presented a 2-h abbreviated mock trial during an obstetrics and gynecology Grand Rounds. A judge may order that a patient receive temporary involuntary inpatient mental health treatment if a judge or jury finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the patient is likely to cause serious harm to himself or others or is “experiencing substantial mental or physical deterioration” that renders him unable to meet basic needs, such as “food, clothing, health, or safety” [13]. In order for the court to authorize administration of psychoactive medication over a patient’s objection, it must be proven, by clear and convincing evidence, that the patient has been ordered to receive inpatient mental health treatment, that the patient presents a danger to himself or others, that the proposed treatment is in the best interests of the patient, and that the patient lacks the capacity to make a decision regarding the medication [14].
ISSN:1042-9670
1545-7230
DOI:10.1007/s40596-019-01065-3