Personenzentrierte Haltung im Rahmen der psychiatrischen Begutachtung?

Abstract

Can psychiatrists who feel committed to the person-centered approach and are used to reacting empathetically in their everyday therapeutic practice remain person-centered in the context of providing expert opinions, even though they are supposed to be impartial, neutral and unbiased in their role as “assistants to the court”? After a brief overview of typical questions and methodological standards of psychiatric expert opinions, the course of an appraisal is outlined, from preparation, exploration and assessment of findings to symptom validation and conclusions. It becomes clear that a person-centered style of conversation can be very helpful in obtaining information. However, it is usually not possible to remain transparent at all times; as a rule, transparency can only be established partially at the end of the exploration and completely in the written assessment. Unlike therapists, experts are required to approach their subjects with a fundamentally skeptical attitude, to compare the subject´s narrative with information from other sources and to make a final evaluation. This is alien to the non-judgmental, person-centered approach.