Gabriel Mihai Mekeres

Background and Objectives: The assessment of dangerousness and risk of recidivism are crucial aspects of forensic psychiatric evaluations, influencing therapeutic and security measures. This study aimed to develop and validate a new tool, the Dangerousness Index in Forensic Psychiatry (IPPML), following a psychometric scale construction methodology. Materials and Methods: The sample consisted of 261 participants (157 males, 104 females) aged 19–75 years, divided into an experimental group (n = 126) with a history of forensic psychiatric examination and a control group (n = 135) diagnosed with schizophrenia. Results: Exploratory factor analysis revealed two factors, Performance and Social, explaining 45.55% of the data variance. The IPPML demonstrated adequate internal consistency (α = 0.881) for the entire sample, with Factor 1 showing strong consistency (α = 0.896) and Factor 2 exhibiting acceptable consistency (α = 0.628). Reliability ranged from 89.6% to 62.8% when administered to participants with psychoses undergoing forensic psychiatric evaluation, decreasing to 42.5% for legally evaluated patients and increasing from 58.7% to 84.3% for participants with schizophrenia without forensic psychiatric evaluation. Discriminant validity analysis indicated higher psychiatric dangerousness with forensic implications in males. Conclusions: The IPPML shows promise as a tool for assessing dangerousness in forensic psychiatry and aiding medical decision-making regarding the risk of antisocial and potentially harmful acts.

Background/Objectives: Forensic psychiatric expertise significantly contributes to clinical criminology. Interdisciplinary investigations, evaluation tactics, and the use of criminology indices are essential for psychosocial prognostic assessments of conflict, aggression, adaptability, and recovery. Methods: This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on forensic psychiatric expertise by analyzing demographic variables such as age, gender, background, and other relevant data including criminal records, forensic antecedents, personal pathological antecedents, diagnosis, and discernment. Our study included 186 patients categorized into pandemic and post-pandemic periods. Results: Most participants were male, with no significant rural–urban distribution differences. During the COVID period, common criminal acts included aggression and child pornography, followed by attempted murder. A significant association was found between discernment and psychiatric disorders (p < 0.0011), with 67.6% of the patients lacking discernment having mental illnesses. Legal outcomes varied with discernment; 60.3% of patients without discernment required mandatory hospitalization (p < 0.0011). Conclusions: Medico-legal antecedents were more frequent during the pandemic, and safety measures were more commonly applied to those lacking discernment.

(1) Background: Scars are the consequence of physiological inherent healing processes of post-traumatic and surgical lesions with a psychological impact. Post-traumatic scarring may induce emotional and behavioral changes through social stigma. In this study we analyze the internalization of scars and their impact on hopelessness, depression, or the perception of social support in subjects with post-traumatic scars compared to people with surgical scars. (2) Methods: to research this suggested model, we analyzed data collected from 110 participants 61 women and 49 men, aged between 18 and 64 years; 55 participants had post-traumatically and 55 surgically acquired scars. They all were examined to assess the characteristics of scars, were asked to complete four psycho-social scales, and the results were compared. (3) Results: our results indicate that people with post-traumatic scars are oriented toward the internalization of scars, depending on their shape and size. We argue that hopelessness, appreciation of scars, age, and how scars are produced are important predictors of internalization. (4) Conclusions: the patient’s attitude toward the appearance of a scar is an indicator of how he/she will react in the future and it could predict the vulnerability to hopelessness. Finally, we nuance the impact of objective bodily harm on the psychological and moral suffering.

Background and objectives: One important forensic activity is the assessment of aesthetic injuries where expert criteria and analysis are insufficiently outlined due to the subjective elements related to the traumatized victim. Unaesthetic morphological changes may occur due to various circumstances committed under the Penal Code, resulting in permanent unaesthetic morphological scarring. Considering that most of the existing scales for the assessment of aesthetic prejudices refer only to morphometric changes, our aim was to create a modern method for the evaluation of aesthetic damage that also considers its social and psychological consequences. Materials and Methods: In this study, we developed the Mekereș Psychosocial Internalization Scale (MPIS), which proposes a clear boundary between the presence or absence of aesthetic damage. The traumatized person is evaluated after a minimum of six months (in the case of an average scar, necessary for defining the character of the scar) to assess changes in the physiognomy or even alterations in the victim’s aesthetic perception of their own body. Our study was conducted on 103 patients with scars, and the results were compared to 101 controls (subjects without scars). Results: Individuals with scars have a distorted perception (compared to controls) of the support provided by significant people [t (202) = 2.473; p = 0.01]. Hypothetically, they will most likely exhibit a nuanced socio-cognitive and psycho-emotional vulnerability that may be the source of future dysfunctions. The fidelity of the MPIS scale was estimated by employing Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, resulting in a value of 0.934 (15 items). The exploratory factorial analysis with Varimax rotation mode sustains a single dominant factor, indicating a good internal consistency. The results of this study provide evidence regarding the psychosocial or psychometric worthiness of MPIS. Conclusions: MPIS can be used for research and as an instrument to assess aesthetic damage or disfigurement by forensic physicians and lawyers.