Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (1):45-58 (2011)
|Abstract||The McNaughton rules for determining whether a person can be successfully defended on the grounds of mental incompetence were determined by a committee of the House of Lords in 1843. They arose as a consequence of the trial of Daniel McNaughton for the killing of Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel’s secretary. In retrospect it is clear that McNaughton suffered from schizophrenia. The successful defence of McNaughton on the grounds of mental incompetence by his advocate Sir Alexander Cockburn involved a profound shift in the criteria for such a defence, and was largely based on the then recently published scientific thesis of the great US psychiatrist Isaac Ray, entitled A Treatise on the Medical Jurisprudence of Insanity. Subsequent discussion of this defence in the House of Lords led to the McNaughton rules, still the basis of the defence of mental incompetence in the courts of much of the English-speaking world. This essay considers one of these rules in the light of the discoveries of cognitive neuroscience made during the 160 years since Ray’s treatise. A major consideration is the relationship between the power of self-control and irresistible impulse as conceived by Cockburn on the one hand, and by cognitive neuroscience on the other. The essay concludes with an analysis of the notion of free will and of the extent to which a subject can exert restraint in the absence of particular synaptic connections in the brain|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Elleke Landeweer, Tineke Abma, Jolijn Santegoeds & Guy Widdershoven (2008). Psychiatry in the Age of Neuroscience: The Impact on Clinical Practice and Lives of Patients. Poiesis and Praxis 6 (1-2):43-55.
Lucinda Vandervort, The Defence of Belief in Consent: Guidelines and Jury Instructions for Application of Criminal Code Section 265(4).
Andreas Heinz & Ulrike Kluge (2011). Anthropological and Evolutionary Concepts of Mental Disorders. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 24 (3):292-307.
Craig Edwards (2010). Beyond Mental Competence. Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (3):273-289.
Andrew Ashworth & Lucia Zedner (2008). Defending the Criminal Law: Reflections on the Changing Character of Crime, Procedure, and Sanctions. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (1):21-51.
Malcolm Thorburn (2011). The Constitution of Criminal Law: Justifications, Policing and the Stateâ€™s Fiduciary Duties. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (3):259-276.
Matthew Broome & Lisa Bortolotti (2009). Mental Illness as Mental: A Defence of Psychological Realism. Humana.Mente 11:25-44.
Ian Howard Dennis (2009). On Necessity as a Defence to Crime: Possibilities, Problems and the Limits of Justification and Excuse. Criminal Law and Philosophy 3 (1):29-49.
Patricia Sheridan (2007). Reflection, Nature, and Moral Law: The Extent of Catharine Cockburn's Lockeanism in Her. Hypatia 22 (3).
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (2008). Replies to Dreier and McNaughton. Philosophical Books 49 (3):218-228.
Steve Matthews (2004). Failed Agency and the Insanity Defence. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 27:413-424.
Romain Schneckenburger (2011). Biological Psychiatry and Normative Problems: From Nosology to Destigmatization Campaigns. Medicine Studies 3 (1):9-17.
Jeanette Hewitt (2010). Schizophrenia, Mental Capacity, and Rational Suicide. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (1):63-77.
Terry Hyland (2012). Mindfulness and the Myth of Mental Illness: Implications for Theory and Practice. Contemporary Buddhism 13 (2):177-192.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads28 ( #43,979 of 548,969 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,969 )
How can I increase my downloads?