Conditions of forensic expert professional activity in the context of preventive management

Abstract

The article explores modern approaches to risk management and examines the specific features of such management in the context of forensic expertise. Forensic expert activity is considered a complex information and social system with a “closed code,” where the human element plays a central role. The uncertainty introduced by this element may lead to both positive and negative outcomes; however, the human factor is usually regarded primarily as a vulnerability that cannot be eliminated solely through technical means. The paper analyzes basic risk management concepts: “pure” risks, which entail only negative consequences, and “speculative” risks, which combine the possibility of both losses and benefits. So, the purpose of an article is to examine the working conditions of forensic expert activity and the psychological states of the forensic expert as sources of risk to the quality of forensic expertise, and to substantiate the need for integrating risk management into the forensic expert domain as a preventive management tool. Methods. Theoretical analysis of risk management concepts and their adaptation to the forensic expert context; analysis of domestic legislation governing forensic expert activity; comparative analysis of approaches to human factor management in adjacent professional fields; review of international research on the psychological condition of forensic experts. The authors argue that forensic expertise represents not a pure but a speculative risk for the parties to the proceedings as well as for the court. It is shown that risk management in the field of expertiseshould encompass not only the mitigation of consequences but also preventive strategies aimed at avoiding crisis conditions. Basic methods of dealing with risks (avoidance, reduction, sharing, acceptance) and opportunities (exploit, enhance, share, ignore) are identified as adaptable to the forensic system. Certain psychological factors inherent in the professional activity of forensic experts are considered as potentialsources of risk. The article states that integrating risk management into forensic expertise is a necessary condition for enhancing its efficiency and resilience. Scientific novelty is grounded on cross-disciplinary approach. For the first time, psychological factors arising from the conditions of forensic expert activity are examined as sources of both pure and speculative risks to the quality of forensic expertise. These risks arecharacterised as unmanaged, given the absence of organisational and legal mechanisms for their identification, assessment and control. The methodological inadequacy of treating the human factor in forensic expertise exclusively as a pure risk – without acknowledging its positive potential – is demonstrated. Conclusions. Psychological states of the forensic expert – including burnout, secondary traumatic stress, compassion fatigue, professional deformation, and destructive forms of stress – constitute sources of risk to the reliability of forensic expert findings, yet fall outside the scope of the existing management framework. Theforensic expert system lacks both the tools to detect relevant dysfunctions and the legal grounds for responding to them. Available scientific instruments – in particular, approaches to psychological support developed for law enforcement personnel that researchers propose extending to the forensic domain – remain unused by the system.