Following the advent of sexually violent predator (SVP) legislation in the early 1990s, forensic evaluators began to apply diagnostic labels related to a paraphilic interest in rape as a mental condition predisposing individuals convicted of sexual offenses to recidivate. The most recent iteration of the concept, other specified paraphilic disorder (non‐consent) (OSPD (non‐consent)), is a commonly utilized diagnostic entity in SVP proceedings. Research on paraphilic interest in coercive sex has failed to define a valid methodology or set of criteria to make a diagnosis of OSPD (non‐consent) and has repeatedly demonstrated that the diagnostic construct has poor interrater reliability. The state of the science pertaining to OSPD (non‐consent) thus raises serious concerns regarding its admissibility in SVP proceedings. Indeed, there are recent cases in which courts have deemed it inadmissible. The forensic expert involved in SVP proceedings should understand admissibility concerns related to OSPD (non‐consent) and how to address them in court.

中文翻译：

---

在性暴力掠夺者诉讼中可受理其他指定的亲友性疾病（不同意）。

在1990年代初期，性暴力掠夺者（SVP）立法出台之后，法医鉴定者开始将与强奸中的嗜友性利益相关的诊断标签用作一种精神疾病，使被定罪的个人容易再犯。该概念的最新迭代，其他指定的亲友性疾病（不同意）（OSPD（不同意）），是SVP程序中常用的诊断实体。对强迫性的亲友兴趣的研究未能确定诊断OSPD（不同意）的有效方法或标准，并一再证明该诊断结构的人间信度较差。因此，与OSPD有关的科学状态（不同意）引起了人们对其在SVP程序中可采性的严重关注。确实，在最近的一些案件中，法院认为这是不可接受的。参与SVP诉讼的法务专家应了解与OSPD相关的可否受理问题（不同意）以及如何在法庭上解决。