Issues in the psychological autopsy of a controversial public figure.

Abstract

Psychological autopsy is an investigative technique employed by social scientists to help determine mode of death in equivocal cases. Data derived from interviews with survivors and inspection of public records are employed to arrive at conclusions about the death motivation of the deceased person just prior to his demise. In applying this technique to the study of the death of a famous person, problems emerged that uniquely illustrated its strengths and weaknesses. The equivocal death of a returned POW who spent 5 years in a North Vietnamese prison camp provided the subject for the psychological autopsy described herein. We believe that the results of the psychological autopsy influenced U.S. government policy about returned POWs.

Suicide, mental disorder and responsibility

“…However, psychological autopsies are retrospective studies; for good reasons, retrospective studies are accorded low scientific status in other areas of psychiatry or psychology. Those who consider the evidence may be invested in the outcomes, and although we aspire to objectivity, the avoidance of bias may be difficult (Selkin & Loya, 1979). There are various types of psychological autopsy (Scott et al, 2006), leading to the belief that one study can not be compared to another (Abondo et al, 2008).…”

Standardizing the Psychological Autopsy: Addressing the Daubert Standard

“…First, psychological autopsies are often criticized because the deceased individual is not available for observation or questioning, which makes this type of evaluation different and more complicated than most evaluations conducted by mental health professionals (Cavanagh et al, 2003; Ogloff & Otto, 1993). In addition, as everyone has a stake in the outcome to the psychological autopsy's findings, be it the decedent's survivors, insurance companies, or other third parties, the information gathered from these sources can be biased (Selkin & Loya, 1979). Last, there is the lack of any standardized protocol and method of conducting the psychological autopsy (Ritchie & Gelles, 2002), thus leaving its application up to the variable skills, training, and sensitivities of interviewers and leaving open the question of the procedure's reliability (Werlang & Botega, 2003).…”

“…• Whether the theories and techniques employed by the witness have been health professionals (Cavanagh et al, 2003;Ogloff & Otto, 1993). In addition, as every-tested • Whether they have been subjected to one has a stake in the outcome to the psychological autopsy's findings, be it the decedent's peer review and publication • Whether the techniques employed survivors, insurance companies, or other third parties, the information gathered from these have a known error rate • Whether they are subject to standards sources can be biased (Selkin & Loya, 1979). Last, there is the lack of any standardized governing their application • Whether the theories and techniques protocol and method of conducting the psychological autopsy (Ritchie & Gelles, 2002), employed enjoy widespread acceptance thus leaving its application up to the variable skills, training, and sensitivities of interview-While the Daubert standard is based on a Supreme Court decision and therefore has its ers and leaving open the question of the procedure's reliability (Werlang & Botega, 2003).…”

The Legacy Of Emile Durkheim

“…Durkheim used this term to indicate an abrupt loss of role and described the anxiety, even panic of people forced to adjust to a dramatically different social environment with little warning. A few years ago I had occasion to study the life of a man whose prototypically anomic suicide, occurred just a few months after his release after six miserable years from a North Vietnamese prisoner-ofwar camp (Selkin & Loya, 1979). The readjustment to civilian life was frightening, and his terror and panic went unrecognized.…”