PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Janusz Heitzman

Publications and source records attributed to Janusz Heitzman.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

[Traumatic stress severity].

Since 1980, a new outlook on stress was applied in connection with the changes in psychiatric concepts and the notion that a traumatic experience may cause specific psychological symptoms varying from the content and source of other psychiatric disorders. The understanding of the trauma, defined by the objective traits of the stressor, separated it from stress as defined by the subjective individual's decision. This was against the current theory of Selye in which the stress reaction is a homogenous entity as a whole, defined by a subjective evaluation of the event, independently of the objective traits. The paper examines new directions in the studies on the meaning of trauma for the person who survived it. According to these studies, the trauma and its consequences cannot be viewed solely in a narrow pathogenic and symptomatic frame. Modern directions of studies on stress led to a model integration of physiological, behavioural and psychological reactions and the trauma itself was to be seen in a cultural and historical context. Today's biopsychocultural model of understanding trauma consists in a complex of common actions from various systems and backgrounds. They comprise the following factors: physical (biological), intrapsychic, interpersonal (familial, social, religious, cultural), educational-professional, economical, political. These systems coexist in a time frame, in common relations and connections. They all affect the capability to evaluate danger, which gives different strategies of coping with oneself. Studies on PTSD give arguments for understanding of the full influence that a trauma can have on a person, and allow for an unlimited outlook on the traumatic situation--its biological, social and existential aspects.

Humans↗

[False forensic expertise--analysis of occurrences].

Main problems that await the modern Polish forensic psychiatry are presented. The most common mistakes made in forensic expertise are discussed and their causes are shown. The need for a change in the manner of teaching forensic psychiatry at an academic, as well as post graduate level to medical students/doctors as well as law officials, has been stressed. The criteria for calling on experts, system of control and evaluation of the expertise formulated and rules of payment to the experts--all need changing. The altered criminal structure and possibilities of putting pressure on experts through corruption, threatening or blackmail were noted. The clearly defined status of the forensic psychiatric expert gives him a guarantee of legal defence and through this an unbiased position. Giving forensic expertise is not only part of the diagnostics in forensic psychiatry. An even layout of protection, treatment and rehabilitation of psychiatrically ill criminals has to be present in this system.

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders↗

[Unnecessary use of security measures and psychiatric hospitalisation].

The authors of this paper formulated an expertise opinion in answering the court on the former opinion of expert psychiatrists which concerned the psychic state and legibility, as well as the necessity of using security measures in the case of a woman who was considered non legible due to a delusional disorder, when she damaged the tyres in a car. The faults in the opinion stimulated the authors to present the results of the analysis formulated, with the idea that other experts will take more care when forming their expertise opinions.

Expert Testimony↗