Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
Full metadata record
|dc.identifier.citation||Psychiatry Psychology and Law, 1995; 2(1):25-35||-|
|dc.description.abstract||Post traumatic stress disorder has historically been surrounded by an atmosphere of controversy. The issues about the validity and aetiology of post traumatic stress disorder have been a major preoccupation in medico legal settings. This paper examines the emergence of current concepts of post traumatic stress disorder and the continuing questions about the status of this diagnosis. The possibility that post traumatic stress disorder is over diagnosed is a frequent concern. However, the current evidence suggests that the reverse is probably more likely to be the case. This raises a series of critical concerns about the quality of forensic psychiatric and psychological assessments in the Australian courts. The need for quality assurance strategies in these settings is canvassed. For plaintiffs who have been traumatised, a series of dilemmas about the legal process is discussed, as this setting can exacerbate their sense of victimisation. © 1995 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.||-|
|dc.publisher||Australian Academic Press||-|
|dc.title||PTSD in the medico-legal setting: Current status and ongoing controversies||-|
|dc.identifier.orcid||McFarlane, A. [0000-0002-3829-9509]||-|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 5|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.