Should a Personality Disorder Qualify as a Mental Disease in Insanity Adjudication?

Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (4):760-763 (2010)
The determinative issue in applying the insanity defense is whether the defendant experienced a legally relevant functional impairment at the time of the offense. Categorical exclusion of personality disorders from the definition of mental disease is clinically and morally arbitrary because it may lead to unfair conviction of a defendant with a personality disorder who actually experienced severe, legally relevant impairments at the time of the crime. There is no need to consider such a drastic approach in most states and in the federal courts, where the sole test of insanity is whether the defendant was “unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct at the time of the offense.” This is because the only symptoms that are legally relevant in such jurisdictions are those that impair reality-testing and thereby affect the person's capacity to understand the nature and consequences of her actions. However, if the test of insanity includes a “volitional prong” (inability to control one's behavior), some way must be found to limit the scope of the defense to the core cases (involving psychotic conditions) to which it has traditionally been applied, and to prevent a shift toward a deterministic account of criminal conduct — i.e., “people can't help being who they are and doing what they do.” The best way of accomplishing this is to limit the definition of mental disease to severe disorders characterized by gross disturbances of the person's capacity to understand reality
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00529.x
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 29,820
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Conundrums and Controversies in Mental Health and Illness.M. Carmela Epright & Robert M. Sade - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (4):722-726.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Insanity and Responsibility.Herbert Fingarette - 1972 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 15 (1-4):6 – 29.
Delusion, Dissociation and Identity.Jeanette Kennett & Steve Matthews - 2003 - Philosophical Explorations 6 (1):31-49.
Obsessions, Compulsions, and Free Will.Walter Glannon - 2012 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 19 (4):333-337.
Failed Agency and the Insanity Defence.Steve Matthews - 2004 - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 27:413-424.
Free Will and Mental Disorder: Exploring the Relationship.Gerben Meynen - 2010 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (6):429-443.
Personality Disorder and the Law: Some Awkward Questions.Jill Peay - 2011 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (3):231-244.
Personality Disorders and Responsibility: Learning From Peay.Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - 2011 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (3):245-248.
Beyond Rational Insanity.Hung-Yul So - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:221-227.
Mental Disorder and Values.Bengt Brülde - 2007 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 14 (2):pp. 93-102.
Added to PP index

Total downloads
47 ( #120,391 of 2,210,108 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #125,746 of 2,210,108 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature