Mad Scientist, Calculated Killer, or Mentally Ill? The Aurora, Colorado Tragedy

July 24, 2012 By Patricia Zapf Comments

How does one go from a PhD Candidate to one of the worst serial killers in American history? This was the question posed by Good Morning America anchor George Stephanopoulos when speaking about James Holmes, the 24-year-old neuroscience PhD student who went on a rampage in Aurora, Colorado killing 12 people and wounding another 58.

Video of an 18-year-old James Holmes taken 6 years ago at a science camp is in stark contrast to the video of him appearing in court for his initial arraignment. The slim, dark-haired teen whose dream was to own a Slurpee machine stands in stark contrast to the flame-red-haired 24-year-old who sat in court with wide eyes and a vacant stare. What makes a person go from one extreme to another?

The booby-trapped apartment designed to kill anyone who entered. The fact that almost no digital footprint of any kind was left behind by Internet searches. The costume, the firepower, the gas mask…what does it all mean? Is James Holmes a mad scientist? A calculated killer? Mentally ill?

While it is too early to know much of anything about James Holmes, his history indicates that he is an intelligent individual who has done well throughout his educational endeavors. Apparently, about four months ago he went on a shopping spree for guns and explosives and, at the beginning of June, wrote a letter to the school indicating that he was dropping out of school. What happened?

As a forensic psychologist, one of the first thoughts that comes to mind is whether this individual is suffering from some type of mental illness. Males who are prone to psychosis typically experience their first psychotic break between the ages of 18 and 24 so, theoretically at least, it is possible that James Holmes is experiencing some type of mental illness.

There are various mental illnesses that are common among mentally disordered offenders and Delusional Disorder is one of the first that comes to mind when thinking about the extreme lengths that Holmes appears to have gone through in booby-trapping his apartment and in planning and setting up the mass shooting.

Whether James Holmes would qualify for an insanity (criminal responsibility) defense or whether his lawyers will present an insanity defense are questions that many are asking and for which only time will tell but we will watch this case with interest and horror as it moves forward.

Images courtesy of nydailynews.com

Filed Under: Clinical Psychology, Featured, Forensic & Clinical Psychology Tagged With: clinical forensic psychology, clinical psychology, forensic psychology

Masters Degree Programs in Forensic Psychology

January 20, 2012 By Patricia Zapf Comments

This article provides a review and summary of various graduate programs offering masters degrees in forensic psychology. There appears to be five fully online masters programs in forensic psychology and at least 13 different campus-based masters programs in forensic psychology. Each of these is reviewed and summarized to provide relevant information to those interested in pursuing graduate education in the field of forensic psychology.

Online Masters Degree in Forensic Psychology

Last year I reviewed and summarized five fully online masters programs in forensic psychology (four of which are based in the United States and one of which is based in the United Kingdom). Each of these programs appears to have its various strengths and weaknesses as well as differences in tuition costs.

For an easy comparison chart of these five programs, please click here.

For summaries and reviews of each of these programs, please click the relevant link below:

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology

University of North Dakota

Argosy University

Walden University

University of Liverpool

Campus-Based Master Degree in Forensic Psychology

Although there are a few programs where students can complete a Masters in Clinical Psychology or a Masters in Experimental Psychology with a concentration on psychology and law, there are also about thirteen programs that offer Masters Degrees in Forensic Psychology.

I have summarized each of these programs with respect to their program description, coursework, tuition, and whether or not a thesis and/or clinical practicum work is required or available as part of the program.

For a summary of the relevant program, please click the links below:

American International College

Arizona State University

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology

College of Saint Elizabeth

Fairleigh Dickinson University

Holy Names University

John Jay College of Criminal Justice

Marymount University

Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology

New York Law School

Roger Williams University

University of Denver

University of North Dakota

Career Profiles and Information

If you are already in a masters or doctoral program in forensic psychology or just want more information on careers in forensic psychology, check out the rest of this site as there are a bunch of articles on career opportunities in forensic psychology as well as a bunch of great career profiles prominent individuals in the forensic psychology arena. Enjoy!

Image courtesy of helpingpsychology.com

Filed Under: Featured, Forensic & Clinical Psychology Tagged With: clinical forensic psychology, clinical psychology, clinical psychology graduate programs, education, forensic psychology, forensic psychology education, forensic psychology masters degree, forensic psychology training, Master's degree, masters in clinical psychology, masters in forensic psychology, online psychology degree, Psychology, psychology degree, study psychology, study psychology online

Cruel and Unusual: Death Penalty Support in America at Lowest Levels in 40 Years

November 22, 2011 By Patricia Zapf Comments

This article describes the results of a recent Gallup Poll on death penalty support in the United States and reviews the history of the death penalty in America. International statistics are also provided, including a list of those countries that continue to use the death penalty as well as those that have abolished this form of punishment.

Recent Poll on Support for the Death Penalty in America

A recent Gallup Poll shows that support for the death penalty amongst Americans has reached a new low—the lowest it has been in the last 40 years. More than one-third of Americans (35%) now oppose the death penalty. This is the highest level of opposition that has been seen since March 1972—the year that the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty to be unconstitutional unless it was applied fairly.

Click here for the full article on the Gallup Poll

Evolution of the Death Penalty in the United States

Execution was an inherited part of American culture beginning before settlement of the colonies. The first recorded execution of an American settler took place in Virginia in 1608 when George Kendall was executed by firing squad for spying. Since that time, between 14,489 and 18,000 people have been executed in the United States under government authority.

In times before the formalization of the country under a single constitution, execution was a fairly common practice. Although crimes for which capital punishment was an option varied by locale, all colonies allowed for the death penalty at some point. For example, persons were given death sentences for suspected witchcraft activities, bestiality, “man stealing,” idolatry, and “cursing a parent” in the Massachusetts settlement. As the colonists fought for independence, execution was used a threat for desertion or treason. Finally, under the official government of the United States, allowance of the death penalty became a national standard. The Constitution set guidelines that permitted both federal and state executions.

Since 1776, the country has vacillated considerably in terms of consensus on death penalty policy. The ratification of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution in 1791 did not halt executions, but has since given rise to numerous challenges including current questions about execution methods. States such as Michigan have held as death penalty abolitionists since 1852, while others, such as Texas, execute more people in one year than other states have ever executed.

Execution in the Twentieth Century

By the twentieth century, execution was an accepted practice of the American criminal justice system. In fact, 1935 saw a greater number of capital sentences than any other year to date. In the mid-1900s, executions for crimes other than murder still occurred, but with infrequency. By the 1960s, views about the death penalty had changed, and the number of condemned persons had declined. In 1968, the Supreme Court ordered a moratorium so as to review death penalty issues.

Furman v. Georgia

The decision in the landmark case of Furman v. Georgia, consolidated with two other cases, briefly halted capital punishment in the United States. Setting the political landscape for this decision, public opinion with regard to the death penalty had shifted significantly since its inception. In 1966, support for the death penalty reached its lowest point in America. A Gallup poll taken months before the Furman ruling found death penalty supporters only marginally outnumbering opponents. William Henry Furman, a relatively uneducated African American man, shot and killed the resident of the dwelling he was attempting to burglarize. After being convicted of murder and sentenced to death, Furman appealed, citing conflicts between his sentence and the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution; his appeal eventually being granted review by the Supreme Court. Rather than being a question of simple technicality, the appeal raised questions about the constitutionality of nationwide death penalty practices. On June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice Warren Burger, ruled five to four that the death penalty was unconstitutional. It was opined that sentencing was often random, and juries were empowered with too much discretion. Each justice seemed to have different reasons for his opinion, and all issued separate opinions, resulting in the longest ever decision. Under the decision, all currently condemned persons were required to be re-sentenced to a noncapital punishment with no possibility of reinstating previous death sentences.

Rather than providing an ultimate answer to the question of capital punishment, the Furman ruling seemed to energize and further entrench activists on both sides of the issue. Within a day of the ruling, five states had declared intention to draft death penalty legislation that qualified under the new guidelines. Legislators worked quickly to reenact capital punishment and, in 1975, more people were sentenced to death in the United States than in any previously recorded year.

Gregg v. Georgia

One of many states to engage in a reworking of sentencing standards related to the death penalty following Furman, Georgia developed a bifurcated system. Specifically, to avoid the randomness cited as unconstitutional, Georgia’s revised procedures required a guilt or innocence phase of the trial for potential capital cases followed by a second phase wherein aggravating conditions must be proved and mitigating factors presented to jurors and/or judges. Under these guidelines, Troy Gregg was convicted of two counts of murder with the aggravating factor of armed robbery. He appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court and ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976) (and two other cases handed down simultaneously) the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was not, in and of itself, unconstitutional nor in conflict with evolving standards of decency, but rather an embedded part of the American justice system. So long as practices were not arbitrary, but instead were part of set criteria for determining sentencing, the court determined death penalty practices to be constitutional. In addition, it was required that potential capital crimes be narrowly defined, that a Supreme Court appeal be provided, and that mitigation be allowed. In sum, this decision clearly allowed for the sentencing and carrying out of executions.

Within six months of death penalty reinstatement, Gary Gilmore was legally executed in Utah. Since that time, additional challenges have been raised that have provided more guidance regarding capital punishment. For example, Coker v. Georgia (1977) determined that the crime of raping an adult could not be sanctioned with the death penalty.

Modern Day Methods

Following the pattern of the Supreme Court, some states have examined fairness issues and temporarily halted capital sentencing, only to have execution reinstated following a change in leadership. Currently, 38 states, the federal government, and the U.S. Military have some form of capital punishment. Modern-day methods of execution include lethal injection, electrocution, hanging, the firing squad, and the gas chamber. In addition to reinstating the practice of execution, the Gregg decision appears to have allowed for more frequent legal dialogue on the topic of capital punishment. Future dangerousness, race, and definition of aggravating factors, among other issues, have been addressed by the courts.

The Issue of Age

One area in which the courts have set limits on the death penalty is with regard to age. In Thompson v. Oklahoma (1988) and Stanford v. Kentucky (1989), both of which were ultimately heard by the Supreme Court, age at the time of the offense was considered in determining whether the death penalty could be imposed. In Stanford, the appellate was over age 17 at the time of the crime, and the court affirmed imposition of the death penalty. Thompson on the other hand, was only 15 when his crime was committed, and the court deter- mined that his execution would violate the Eighth Amendment. Until 2005 the death penalty was not pursued when defendants were under 16 years of age at the time of the offense.

Relatively recently, the Supreme Court increased the age at which a person can be sanctioned with capital punishment. At the age of 17, Christopher Simmons plotted with two younger friends to kidnap and murder a female victim. He and another person broke into her home, bound her, and threw her from a bridge, resulting in her death. He was found guilty and sentenced to death, and the case was eventually heard by the Supreme Court. In Roper v. Simmons (2005) the court cited behavioral science literature finding that adolescents do not have the same level of maturity as adults and are more likely to behave impulsively. More importantly, the court considered a “national consensus” argument that involved the fact that only three states had executed an offender who was a juvenile at the time of the crime within the last decade. Finally, the court reviewed the positions of the international community, a minority of whom allow for the execution of minors. As such, the court set the standard for consideration of capital punishment at the age of 18 at the time of the offense.

The Issue of Mental Retardation or Developmental Disability

In addition to exploring the question of age, courts and legislators have reviewed mental status issues and their relevance to criminal sanctions. In Penry v. Lynaugh (1989) the Supreme Court determined that the execution of mentally retarded offenders was not specifically banned. More recently, in Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the court reversed its earlier decision. In this case, Darryl Atkins and an accomplice were convicted of abducting, robbing, and killing a male victim. Despite Atkins’ documented IQ of 59, he was sentenced to death. Again, the Supreme Court cited the “national consensus” position, noting that the execution of mentally retarded individuals was not supported by state statutes and practices. In addition, it was held that the purported purposes of the death penalty, retribution and deterrence, were not satisfied by executing mentally retarded persons. As such, execution of these individuals was found to be in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court allowed for further review of this question as criteria for the determination of mental retardation were not specified.

The Issue of Mental Illness

Related to the issue of executing mentally retarded individuals is the issue of executing mentally ill individuals. Accepted standards of practice exist to ensure mentally ill persons are competent to stand trial and to determine whether an individual should be held criminally responsible for a given behavior. In Ford v. Wainwright (1986), the Supreme Court addressed whether mentally ill persons who have been sentenced to death should be executed. The court held that, under the Eighth Amendment, it was not acceptable to carry out a death sentence against a person so “insane” as not to understand the nature or purpose of the punishment (e.g., the punishment of death or its link to the commission of the crime). This ruling falls far short of exempting mentally ill individuals from execution. It appears likely, however, that further legal discourse on the topic is on the horizon.

Capital Punishment in the International Community

International developments within the last 20 years or so have produced a clear, strong trend away from capital punishment. The number of countries that have abolished the death penalty is at an all-time high and the international community has called upon those countries that still use the death penalty to sharply curtail its use. In addition, international agreements have expressed a strong preference for an end to all executions.

As of December, 2000, the number of countries that had abolished the death penalty for all crimes, whether in peacetime or wartime, totaled 76 with an additional 11 countries abolishing the death penalty for ordinary crimes in peacetime, and an additional 36 countries being considered de facto abolitionist as they had not executed anyone within the last 10 years. Thus, 37 percent (71 countries) of the international community had retained the death penalty as of the end of 2000, a significant decrease from the 56 percent that had retained the death penalty as of 1988 and the 47 percent that had retained it as of the end of 1995.

With respect to the number of executions that take place, China leads the world in overall number of executions. For the period 1994–1998, China executed a total of 12, 338 people (although some Chinese scholars estimate that the true number may be a lot higher); Iran executed the second highest number, with 505 executions; Saudi Arabia executed 465 people; Ukraine and Turkmenistan executed 389 and 373 people, respectively, although executions ceased during 1997 for both countries. The United States was sixth highest for that same period with 274 individuals being executed (93 of these in Texas). When the estimated annual rate per million population is examined for this same time period, Turkmenistan leads the international community with 14.92 people per million being executed annually, followed closely by Singapore with 13.93 people per million being executed annually; Saudi Arabia executed 4.65 people per million annually; and Belarus executed 3.20 people per million annually. China, although having the highest number of executions, executed 2.01 people per million annually and the United States was far lower at 0.20 people per million executed annually during that time period.

Recently, China has taken steps to respond to domestic and international criticism regarding its extensive use of capital punishment in an effort to reduce the high rate of executions. On October 30, 2006, China adopted new rules requiring that, as of January 1, 2007, all death sentences be reviewed by the Supreme People’s Court. The National People’s Congress, China’s legislature, approved this amendment, which restores a power that was stripped from the Supreme Court in 1983, in an effort to reduce the widespread and arbitrary use of the death penalty. China had been facing increasing criticism over the last few years after a number of executed individuals had later been proved innocent.

Countries that have Abolished the Death Penalty for All Crimes (n = 76)

Andorra, Angola, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d”Ivoire, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kiribati, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Federated States of Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marion, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Slo- vak Republic, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Northern Ireland, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vatican City State, Venezuela

Countries that have Abolished the Death Penalty for Ordinary Crimes in Peacetime (n = 11)

Albania, Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Cyprus, El Salvador, Fiji, Israel, Latvia, Mexico, Peru

**Countries Considered to be de facto Abolishionist with no Executions in 10 Years or More (n = 36)**

Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Chile, Congo (Republic), Dominica, Eritrea, Gabon, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea, Jamaica, Laos, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Myanmar, Nauru, Niger, Papua New Guinea, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Togo, Tonga, Turkey, Samoa, Yugoslavia

Countries that still use the Death Penalty (n = 71)

Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Botswana, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo (Democratic Republic), Cuba, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Kazakstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Mongolia, Morocco, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Palestinian Authority, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwan- da, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, South Korea, Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe

Portions of this article were excerpted from: McLearen, A. M., & Zapf, P. A. (2007). The death penalty: A brief review of historical roots and current practices relevant to the mental health practitioner (pp. 295-319). In R. K. Ax & T. J. Fagan (Eds.), Corrections, mental health, and social policy. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Image courtesy of crimeanddeviance.com

Filed Under: Featured, Forensic & Clinical Psychology, Professional Info, Resources Tagged With: featured, forensic psychology, legal

International Human Rights and Mental Disability Law: When the Silenced are Heard

November 15, 2011 By Patricia Zapf Comments

online generic viagra

y.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/internationalhumanrights.jpg” alt=”" width=”150″ height=”150″ />International Human Rights and Mental Disability Law: When the Silenced are Heard

A recently published book (Oxford University Press) in the American Psychology-Law Society’s Book Series provides a great resource for academics, practitioners, legal scholars, and policy makers involved in mental health work, both nationally and internationally. This article provides a summary of the contents of the book and some brief comments about the book.

About the American Psychology-Law Society Book Series

The American Psychology-Law Society (APLS; Division 41 of the American Psychological Association) is an interdisciplinary organization devoted to scholarship, practice, and public service in psychology and law. Its goals include advancing the contributions of psychology to the understanding of law and legal institutions through basic and applied research; promoting the education of psychologists in matters of law and the education of legal personnel in matters of psychology; and informing the psychological and legal communities and the general public of current research, educational, and service activities in the field of psychology and law. APLS membership includes psychologists from the academic, research, and clinical practice communities as well as members of the legal community. Research and practice is represented in both the civil and criminal legal arenas. The APLS Book Series serves as an outlet for bringing the latest developments in psychology and law to the public and the psycholegal community. APLS has chosen Oxford University Press as a strategic partner because of its commitment to scholarship, quality, and the international dissemination of ideas. These strengths will help APLS reach its goal of educating the psychology and legal professions and the general public about important developments in psychology and law. The focus of the book series reflects the diversity of the field of psychology and law, as we will publish books on a broad range of topics.

Editor’s Comments about International Human Rights and Mental Disability Law: When the Silenced are Heard

As the current Editor of the APLS Book Series, it is my pleasure to get to work with authors in developing their proposals and their books for this series and to make a few comments about each of their books in the series forward. This book was accepted and developed by my predecessor, Professor Ronald Roesch, who edited the APLS Book Series prior to my tenure in this role, which began in 2009. In the series foreword for the book, Professor Roesch writes:

“With his current book, Professor Perlin demonstrates that the violations of human rights that he so forcefully identified in the United States are also prevalent in many countries throughout the world. Based on his analysis of law and practice, he highlights the pervasive problems that allow human rights violations to perpetuate. These include lack of comprehensive legislation, lack of independent counsel, inadequate care, lack of community programming, and inhumane forensic systems. He is not content to merely identify these human rights violations. He is an advocate and views his analysis of abuses as a foundation for his proposals for changes in law, policy, and practice that would improve the treatment of persons with mental disabilities. Indeed, creating change is at the heart of this book. As he cogently argues, it is essential that countries worldwide ‘devote themselves to significant and ameliorative reform of their mental health systems.’ I believe that this book will serve as a catalyst for the far0reaching changes that will ultimately establish Professor Perlin’s call for a constitutionally based mental disability law jurisprudence.”

Publisher’s Description

Society is largely blind-often willfully blind-to the ongoing violations of international human rights law when it comes to the treatment of persons with mental disabilities. Despite a robust set of international law principles, standards and doctrines, and the recent ratification of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, people with mental disabilities continue to live in some of the harshest conditions that exist in any society. These conditions are the product of neglect, lack of legal protection against improper and abusive treatment, and social attitudes that demean, trivialize and ignore the humanity of persons with disabilities.

International Human Rights and Mental Disability Law: When the Silenced are Heard draws attention to these issues in order to shed light on deplorable conditions that governments continue to ignore, and to invigorate the debate on a social policy issue that remains a low priority for most of the world’s nations. Examining the mistreatment of persons with mental disabilities around the world, Michael Perlin identifies universal factors that contaminate mental disability law, including lack of comprehensive legislation and of independent counsel; inadequate care; poor or nonexistent community programming; and inhumane forensic systems. Using examples from Western and Eastern Europe, South America, Africa and Asia, Perlin examines and summarizes the growing field of international mental health law, arguing that governmental inaction demeans human dignity, denies personal autonomy, and disregards the most authoritative and comprehensive prescription of human rights obligations. As Perlin argues, these issues pertain to all citizens of the world who value human rights and who care about how we treat those of us who may be most vulnerable. International Human Rights and Mental Disability Law is an indispensable resource for scholars, policymakers, governmental officials, and mental health professionals who care about the treatment of those with disabilities, and to human rights advocates and activists worldwide.

Chapter Outline

Ch. 1: Introduction and Overview

Ch. 2: International Human Rights Law in Perspective: legal Issues and Social Constructs

Ch. 3: Mental Disability Law in a Comparative Law Context

Ch. 4: The Use of Mental Disability Law to Suppress Political Dissent

Ch. 5: The Universal Factors

Ch. 6: The Application of International Human Rights Law to Mental Disability Law: Specific Contexts

Ch. 7: The UN Convention: The Impact of the New UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on International Mental Disability Law

Ch. 8: The UN Convention: The Role of Counsel

Ch. 9: A Disability Rights Tribunal for Asia and the Pacific

Ch. 10: Therapeutic Jurisprudence

Ch. 11: Conclusion

Author Information

Michael L. Perlin is a professor of law at New York Law School, where he is also Director of the International Mental Disability Law Reform Project and Director of the Online Mental Disability Law Program. He has taught and done advocacy work on six continents and is the author of 20 books and over 200 articles on all aspects of mental disability law. He spent eight years as director of the New Jersey Division of Mental Health Advocacy, where he provided legal services to individuals in cases involving civil commitment, institutional rights, and community care issues.

For more titles from the American Psychology-Law Society Book Series, please click here.

Filed Under: Books, Forensic & Clinical Psychology, Professional Info, The Law Tagged With: books

Forensic Psychology Salary Information | Settings

September 12, 2011 By Patricia Zapf Comments

no prescription cialis

y1.jpg” alt=”" width=”225″ height=”225″ />One of the primary considerations for many students who are thinking about the possible career choices in which they might be interested is, of course, salary. This article provides some information regarding the salary range that one could expect to earn with a career in forensic psychology.

As with any career field, the amount that one can expect to earn depends upon a number of factors. In forensic psychology, those factors include: level of education, setting in which one works, the types of activities in which one engages, and the number of years of experience.

Level of Education

In general, either a Masters or Doctoral degree is necessary to engage in the activities of a forensic psychologist. It is possible, after obtaining a Bachelor’s degree, to work in some of the same settings as forensic psychologists, but the pay earned with a Bachelor’s degree will be substantially less than that earned by those with Masters or Doctoral degrees.

In general, the starting salary for a Masters degree in psychology is typically about $10,000 higher than the starting salary for those with Bachelors degrees in psychology. In addition, it is generally the case that those with Masters degrees will earn higher salary increases than those with Bachelors degrees.

In a similar vein, the starting salary for those with Doctoral degrees in psychology is again about $10,000 higher than for those with Masters degrees in psychology, although this can vary considerably by type of setting.

As a very general statement, from data collected across the United States and averaged (so these can vary considerably by professional setting and geographic location), those with Bachelor’s degrees in psychology can expect to begin their careers with salaries in the $30,000s, those with Master’s degrees can expect to begin their careers with salaries in the $40,000s, and those with Doctoral degrees in psychology can expect to begin their careers with salaries in the $50,000s.

Professional Settings

Forensic psychologists work in a wide variety of professional settings. Some of these settings include: academic or research settings such as universities, law schools, or research institutions; clinical settings, such as community mental health clinics, forensic psychiatric facilities, or state hospitals; legal settings, such as court clinics, or mental health courts; correctional settings, such as at jails, prisons, halfway houses, or community probation offices; as well as a wide variety of private practice settings, depending upon one’s area of expertise. Salaries can vary widely across these different settings and typically depend upon the number of years of experience of the forensic psychologist.

Academic/Research Settings

In terms of academic settings, private universities, law schools, and research institutes typically pay higher salaries than public universities. As a general statement, doctoral-level psychologists can expect to earn annual salaries ranging between $55,000 and $130,000, depending upon their experience and rank.

Clinical Settings

Clinical settings can vary widely and so the salaries that forensic psychologists earn in these settings also vary. As a general statement, a Doctoral-level forensic psychologist can probably expect to earn between $50,000 and $90,000 in most types of forensic clinical settings. Again, this will vary with experience and rank. Administrative positions tend to be higher paying and private facilities tend to pay higher salaries than public or state clinical settings.

Legal Settings

The types of legal settings in which forensic psychologists work can include mental health courts or court clinics. Again, salaries can vary widely and depend on one’s experience and expertise. As a general statement, doctoral-level forensic psychologists who work in these types of settings can expect to earn about the same salaries as those working in state clinical facilities (somewhere between $50,000 and $90,000).

Correctional Settings

There is a great need for forensic psychologists within the correctional system. This system is one of the largest employers of Masters-level forensic psychologists. The annual salaries of forensic psychologists within the correctional system depends upon the number of years of experience in the system and the educational attainment of the individual, with doctoral-level psychologists earning more than master-level psychologists. Masters-level forensic psychologists in the correctional system can expect to earn annual salaries of about $40,000 to $80,000 depending upon their level of experience and number of years working in the correctional system. Doctoral-level psychologists can expect to earn annual salaries of about $50,000 to $140,000 depending on their experience, number of years working in the system, and whether they have administrative responsibilities.

Private Practice

Forensic psychologists in private practice determine their rate, typically by the hour, so it can be difficult to calculate an annual salary since the hours vary considerably. Some forensic psychologists choose to work only a few forensic cases each year but may earn large sums of money for this work. The hourly rate that a forensic psychologist charges varies widely and is typically dependent upon his or her experience and area of expertise. Generally, forensic psychologists charge more per hour for their time than do non-forensic clinical psychologists since the legal issues inherent to forensic psychology place the psychologist at a higher risk for litigation and since forensic psychology is an area of specialization. Hourly rates for forensic psychologists can vary between $150 and $600 (or even higher) depending upon the type of forensic work that is being conducted and the experience and expertise of the forensic psychologist.

For more information on the salary level of psychologists and forensic psychologists, please see the post entitled Forensic Psychology Salary Information and other related posts under the Forensic Psychology and Education and Training tabs on this site.