The role of personality disorders within the legal arena has been of interest to clinicians since the early days of psychiatry when physicians were called to court in an effort to explain criminal behaviors.1 Clinical and legal interest, as well as fascination of the general public about understanding why people are involved in crime and other behaviors that offend, astound, harm, or frighten, continues to the present day.2-4 Though it is often thought that this understanding remains the province of forensically trained psychiatrists or psychologists applying specialized skills to evaluating individuals Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical who have entered the criminal justice system or claim to have been civilly wronged,

there is no specific prohibition against any clinician providing expertise within the legal system. Many do so regularly in the contexts of involuntary commitment or assessing competency to make treatment decisions, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical or are asked by attorneys or the courts to share their specific content-related expertise. It is very common for questions to arise in these settings as to what significance,

if any, should be given to the presence of personality Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical disorders. selleck chemical mental illnesses, including personality disorders, can potentially modify applications of the law in criminal and civil contexts. Classification and specific definitions of mental disorders can have a major impact on how and when they serve as modifiers.5 The legal system’s perception of mental illness is defined by society, and it is the application of that understanding to a specific person or fact pattern that defines the relationship between mental illness and the law. Clinicians entering the forensic arena, however, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical for the most part, do not immerse themselves in thinking about Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical the current social definition or understanding of mental illness. Because of their training and experience, clinicians most often resort to explaining mental illness through the lens of the most widely accepted classification system, which for the last 40 years, at least in the United States, has been the latest version

of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). To date, the DSM6 has utilized a categorical approach to personality disorder diagnoses, in that an individual must meet specific criteria in order to be categorized as having a personality disorder. But the DSM has cautioned clinicians and researchers (its intended science user audiences) that inclusion of diagnostic categories does not implythat they meet legal criteria for what constitutes mental disease, disorder, or disability: “The clinical and scientific considerations involved in categorization of these conditions as mental disorders may not be wholly relevant to legal judgments, for example, that take into account such issues as individual responsibility, disability determination, and competency.