Forensic psychiatry developed largely in relation to lawyers’ efforts to save their clients from a death sentence and involved proving ‘facts’ about insanity, intent, competence, and the like. It spread to include other facts, such as paternity, the cause of death, and a broad range of data relevant to assessing the presence or extent of malpractice. As all clinicians know, however, what is defined as malpractice has mushroomed in recent years and the umbrella of forensic psychiatry now embraces a considerably larger area than it did even a decade ago.

The essentials of classic forensic psychiatry were the assessment and treatment of those who had been statutorily labeled as dangerous, the protection of the public, and the protection of the rights of patients (including their right to treatment). In a technological society such as ours, however, the roles of medical professionals have become increasingly intertwined with those of legal professionals, for scientific advances in medicine relate more and more to the quality of life and the fundamental rights of individuals, and they raise questions about the effects of interventions in the lives of today's patients on tomorrow's society (Harrison, 1983). At the present time, the phrase ‘health law’ is used to emphasize the expanded interface between medicine and the law and the substantial body of law that now governs the relations between health care providers, professionals, third-party payers, and patients (Stromberg, 1983).