Consultants have many distinctions among themselves. Some of them spend their time by mostly doing their business with the witnesses or making demonstrative displays, while others focus on developing trial strategies effectively.
Generally, it is the job of psychologists as a consultant to conclude which of the available potential jurors will be the fair option to seek the best result for their client in the case. These psychologists as a consultant investigate, evaluate, and judge which probable jurors have particular biases or prejudices against their client. A psychologist ensure that the juror is offering the good psychological edge to their clients. These psychologists as a consultant are able to evaluate whether a juror is lying or not or is not comfortable in any specific matter involved in the case.
As their involvement with the courts and the legal professions are growing, these psychologists are having several common ethical issues in the law enforcement agencies. These issues are found to cross some fields sometimes. These fields are associating with a dispute among agency necessities and the quality of the mental vocation, confidentiality, dualism of the relationship between them and the administration of agency and the officials getting services (Stolle et al, 1996). To help these psychologists with these issues, the psychology association requires them to stick with strict instructions, code of behavior with a set of fundamentals must follow.
While in the corrections system, different areas and duties are there that a psychologist must be aware of like essentially the mental health needs of their provision, but many other jobs as well. It is one of the ethical issues of the psychologists in corrections to withstand the load of what community and administrative resources can place on them (Reiser, M, 1973). That’s why the International Association formulates an additional standard for psychology services, just to help them deal with these additional load and dilemmas that in everyday roles they have to face.
These psychologists performs different duties like teaching, experimentation, managing other students, and different other associated activities.
Another issue these psychologists face is that the judge decides if their evidence is allowed or not, or the court needs a solid conclusion in an either this or that condition, even where the science is not factual (Pope et al, 1992). To deal with these dilemmas, the law society gave an outline “Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists”, in which it gives more accurate guidelines, on forensic psychology.
Psychologists have a number of character to affect the egalitarianism structure, encountering the law enforcement, and the corrections department, while courts are also there.
Stolle, D. P., Robbennolt, J. K., & Wiener, R. L. (1996). The perceived fairness of the psychologist trial consultant: An empirical investigation. Law & Psychol. Rev., 20, 139.
Reiser, M. (1973). The police psychologist: A new role. Professional Psychology, 4(2), 119.
Pope, K. S., & Vetter, V. A. (1992). Ethical dilemmas encountered by members of the American Psychological Association: A national survey. American Psychologist, 47(3), 397.