Learning Goal: I'm working on a psychology question and need guidance to help me learn. Write a discussion post (between 150-300 words) that responds to the question(s) below. Use the information you learned from your text, lecturette, and lecture slides to inform and shape your posts. You may also use additional resources from outside of class. Once you have completed your discussion post, reply to at least two of your classmates posts (at least 75 words). Your initial post and your peer reply should be written with proper grammar & spellings, demonstrate thoughtful engagement with the topic, and be respectful & considerate. Prompt: What obstacles are placed in the path of victims of intimate partner violence who want to leave the relationship? What recommendations would you make to someone experiencing intimate partner violence? nots: This chapter reviews a wide variety of tasks performed by forensic psychologists in their interaction with criminal courts. The available research suggests that the dominant tasks revolve around the various competencies that criminal defendants must possess to participate in criminal proceedings. There appears to be no consensus about how competency evaluations should be conducted, although most guidelines and publications indicate that the traditional clinical interview by itself does not suffice. Although some psychologists administer traditional psychological tests, instruments specifically designed to measure competency are now widely available. Among the most promising are the MacCAT-CA, developed by researchers from the MacArthur Foundation, and the ECST-R, which was designed to assess malingering as well as competency. The results of the competency evaluation appear to have a significant effect on a judge’s decision, with judges almost always agreeing with recommendations offered by the examiner. Psychologists also conduct sanity evaluations, more formally known as assessments of criminal responsibility or mental state at the time of the offense. These evaluations are far more complex than most evaluations of adjudicative competence--but there are exceptions. The assessment of criminal responsibility requires the collection of a large amount of background data, interviews with the defendant, and contacts with other individuals who may be able to provide insight into the defendant’s state of mind when the crime was committed. The Rogers Criminal Responsibility Scale (R-CRAS) and the Mental State at the Time of the Offense Screening Evaluation (MSE) are the dominant instruments available for this purpose, though research suggests they are less likely to be used than are competency assessment instruments. The decision as to whether a defendant was sane at the time of the offense--and therefore can be held responsible--may be made by a judge or a jury, applying a variety of rules adopted by states and under federal law. Over the last quarter century, both states and the federal government have made it increasingly difficult for defendants to mount a successful insanity defense, such as by narrowing the rules or placing the burden on the defendant to prove his or her insanity by clear and convincing evidence. A controversial topic relating to both competency and insanity is the administration of psychoactive medication against an individual’s will. Medicated defendants may suffer a variety of side effects, some of which may interfere with their capacity to participate in the trial process. The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated that extreme care must be taken before medicating defendants against their will to restore them to competency. The Court has ruled, though, that defendants have a right not to be medicated during their trials if they are pleading not guilty by reason of insanity and want jurors to see them in their natural, nonmedicated state. Psychologists also consult with criminal courts as judges are preparing to sentence an offender. These sentencing evaluations are conducted primarily to determine whether the offender would be a good candidate for a particular rehabilitative approach, such as substance abuse treatment or a violent offender program. Sentencing evaluations also may involve assessments of risk, however, because courts are often interested in an appraisal of the convicted offender’s dangerousness. Risk assessment remains an imperfect enterprise, but a variety of valid instruments are available for this purpose. The chapter ends with a discussion of sexually violent predators and their indeterminate commitment to civil mental institutions. Approximately 20 states and the federal government now allow such a commitment, provided that the offender is dangerous and has a mental disorder or some mental abnormality--a very broad term that has been criticized by many scholars. Although statutes often indicate that treatment will be provided, it is widely suspected that the primary intention of these statutes is to keep sexual predators incapacitated. Review the attached lecture slides Bartol_5e_PPT_05.pptx reply to this: Victims of Intimate Partner Violence may not interpret the red flags early on in the relationship leading them to remain a part of it longer than they should. By Stages 8 and 9, the victim can experience confusion about the whole situation (Bartol, 2019). Eventually the abuser will increase the frequency and intensity of violence when the victim threatens to leave. This will make the abused believe it is safer to stay in the relationship (Bartol, 2019). Another complicated factor is the fact that the abuser will start to say he/she will stop, which can confuse the victim even more. Once the victims make the attempt to leave, they may be stalked or threatened (Bartol, 2019). I saw my mother go through this with her ex-husband. He was not super violent, but he was violent and harrassed her by stalking or calling the house private and berating her. My first thought is connecting a woman in this situation to a women's shelter. I want to suggest friends and family, but depending on how dangerous the aggressor is, this may not be enough. I've also heard that Restraining orders are not enough protection because then the abuser knows where you are. In the case where the abuser is not in full control, I will say the woman should change her address and other identifiiers as soon as possible in order to distance herself from him. It is unfortunate that none of this is easy no matter how intense the relationship is. All I can do is hope that if I'm friends with someone who is involved with a potentially violent man that she listens to her loved ones when they try to help her or warn her. Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2019). Introduction to forensic psychology: Research and application (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. reply to this : There are many obstacles that are placed in the path of victims of intimate partner violence who want to leave the relationship. One of the most commonly used assessment instrument for determining the extent of intimate partner violence is the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). The CTS measures the frequency and severity of behaviors that partners engage in during an argument. This is an example of how data that is used can dimmish the act of violence to law enforcement which can lessen the assistance in a manner which would decrease the timing of an intervention when intimate partner violence is reported. Financial resources for transportation, child care, employment, food, clothing, housing, healthcare and insurance are barriers for victims who want to leave. Community resources such as shelters and therapy are scarce. The abuser always wants to instill fear and control over the victim which ultimately makes them stay in the situation longer. Recommendations I would make to someone experiencing intimate partner violence would be to offer numbers and addresses to counseling services, shelters ,police, domestic hotlines, and be a listening ear and to not judge.