Judging Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review of Clinician Attitudes and Responses to Borderline Personality Disorder; and an Examination of Causal Attributions, Stigmatising Stereotypes and Jury Decision Making Regarding the ICD-11 “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” Criteria

Baker, James (2020) Judging Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review of Clinician Attitudes and Responses to Borderline Personality Disorder; and an Examination of Causal Attributions, Stigmatising Stereotypes and Jury Decision Making Regarding the ICD-11 “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” Criteria. Doctoral thesis, University of East Anglia.

[img]
Preview
PDF
Download (2MB) | Preview

Abstract

Aims: This portfolio aims to aid understanding of processes of mental health stigma relating to “Borderline Personality Disorder” (BPD), and how developments in the nosology of Personality Disorder may affect the perceptions of laypeople in legal settings. It contains a review of the evidence concerning clinician attitudes and reactions toward BPD, and an empirical investigation of the effect of International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11) terminology upon jury decision-making and perceptions.

Design: This portfolio consists of an general introduction to the topic, a systematic review of clinician attitudes and responses to BPD, an empirical paper outlining a quasi-experimental study of the effect of the “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” ICD-11 classification upon jury decision-making, an extended methodology, and an overall discussion and evaluation section.

Findings: The systematic review confirms that negative attitudes toward BPD remain a problem in clinical groups and are likely to relate to both unhelpful stereotypes and challenging therapeutic interactions, implicating a need for well-evidenced training programmes. Various methodological limitations of this literature are discussed.

The empirical paper identified significant differences relating to increased perceptions of dangerousness and the need for segregation and coercion when a defendant’s mental health problems were described as a “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern”, although differences in jury-decision making were not observed.

Value of work: This work indicates that BPD remains a particularly stigmatised diagnosis among clinicians, and this is likely to remain the case until well-evidenced training programmes are made a crucial component of ongoing professional development. This work makes a novel contribution to the study of jury perceptions and decision-making and is possibly the first to assess the effect of the new ICD-11 classification upon processes of stigma toward Personality Disorder. It has important implications for the way in which clinicians communicate clinical information in legal settings.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
Depositing User: Chris White
Date Deposited: 29 Oct 2020 15:53
Last Modified: 29 Oct 2020 15:53
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/77466
DOI:

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item