Management theory-Functions of management
Prepare a 600-700 word paper in which you define the four functions of management (planning, organizing, leading, and controlling).
Forensic Psychology Evaluations in Civil Court
There are particular evaluations utilized by the civil court because of the application and purpose of these evaluations. The Clinical Psychology Associates (2015) explain this as follows, “Forensic Psychologists perform evaluations in a large number of civil and administrative settings. These involve evaluations in Worker’s Compensation systems, Disability Insurance or Social Security Disability Determinations, personal injury evaluations, fitness for duty evaluations, civil competencies, and determinations involving placements or entitlements for accommodations. Evaluations may also include evaluation of possibly impaired professionals. Often, in these systems distinctions are made between treating and evaluating providers.” Additionally it is important to note the particular role of the evaluating psychologist. When labelled an IME or Independent Medical Evaluation, the evaluation is (Clinical Psychological Associates, 2015), “performed by a retained expert in a civil case either for the plaintiff or insured or for the defendant or insurance company. While the forensic psychologist may be retained by a party in a context of litigation, it is the expert’s role to assist the trier of fact by providing objective evaluation. ”
For the purpose of this task, I have chosen to concentrate on 3 commonly contested topics in civil courts – personal injury evaluation, fitness for duty evaluations and civil competencies evaluations. What kind of evaluations are they? The short description that follows provides a simple overview:
- Personal Injury Evaluation – dependent on the role (either appointed by court as an IME), the forensic psychologist assist the party that hires him/her by giving expertise via the evaluation and examination of the individual to test whether he or she indeed displays an alleged psychological injury. A key element is that the evaluation allows for the causality of the injury to be determined which in most cases is the accused party. Foote (2009) explains, “Practice in the civil arena is especially challenging because of the broad array of injuries claimed by plaintiffs. This means that the forensic psychologist practicing in civil cases may encounter claims for emotional damages from fire, verbal insults, auto accidents, maiming, dirty jokes in email, and many other sources.” Whatever the injury or damage, the evaluation is designed so as to test for the claim.
- Fitness for Duty (FFD) Evaluation – often, in police departments or in the armed forces, new recruits or applicants are given psychological tests to see if they are ‘psychology healthy’ and fit for duty. At work, similar regular tests are provided, especially on occasions of trauma when individuals have been subjected to violence or traumatic events due to their role. Fitness for Duty evaluations however are not just for the armed forces and law enforcement. Almost all roles in organizations require individuals to exhibit psychological health at particular levels (i.e. doctors, nurses, drivers, pilots, civil servants, teachers) so that FFD evaluations are often crafted for particular professions and organizations ‘fit for purpose’. The forensic psychologist in court uses a number of FFD tests to determine fit for duty according to role and profession.
- Civil Competencies Evaluations – A civil competency is according to Kenney (n.d.), “the capacity to make decisions and communicate them about money and health care.” It also includes the ability to enter into contracts and decisions and taking responsibility for/about property and the self. All in all, civil competencies include – working, driving, parenting, making medical decisions, providing informed consent, caring for self, caring for others, caring for property and entering agreements and contracts. Evaluations are tailored to whatever competency is tested. For example, if it is a question of informed consent, the evaluation is done to test if the individual is competent enough to have made an informed decision so as to give consent.
I would choose to apply a personally injury evaluation if my role was that of an IME and I had to support the plaintiff’s claim of a particular injury (i.e. an emotional injury/traumatic distress caused by a particular event – like the harassment of a boss). I would choose to apply an FFD evaluation if I would be asked to assess a police officer’s fitness for duty in a court case where that officer’s ‘mental fitness’ is essential to have made a particular decision which would have led to an outcome (i.e. injuries of a suspect) and lastly I would choose to apply a competency evaluation if I would be ask to determine if a plaintiff has the capacity to ‘parent’ in a custody case. In reflection, I believe that there are quite a number of evaluations largely because of the many different applications evaluations have in civil court. The key is to find the most appropriate evaluation and strategy to help the court determine what is just.
- Clinical Psychology Associates (2015). Forensic Psychological and Neuropsychological Evaluation, Assessment Testing Services. URL: http://cpancf.com/forensic_evaluation_testing.asp
- Foote, W. (2009). A Civil Practice: Tort and Civil Rights Cases. URL: http://www.forensicpsychologyunbound.ws/OAJFP/Civil_Practice.html
- Kenney, K. (n.d.). Civil Competencies. URL: http://www.courtconsults.com/Civil%20Competencies.htm