Criminal Law and Philosophy 9 (4):645-693 (2015)

The Breivik case in Norway has motivated a reassessment of Norwegian insanity law by the Norwegian government. Because Norway since 2002 has utilized a “medical model” for legal insanity—a model according to which the legal excuse of insanity is identified with some medical concept such as psychosis—the Norwegian reexamination of its law is not without interest throughout the world. In this paper, I utilize the Anglo-American experience with different medical models for insanity to assess the current Norwegian law on insanity. I defend a strong version of the medical model against standard criticisms advanced against it in the Anglo-American literature, and venture some suggested improvements in how that model was applied in the Breivik case
Keywords Mental illness  Insanity  Psychosis  Breivik  Medical model  Medical disorder
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11572-014-9305-6
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,657
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

1. Freedom and Resentment.Peter Strawson - 1962 - In John Martin Fischer & Mark Ravizza (eds.), Perspectives on Moral Responsibility. Cornell University Press. pp. 1-25.
Brains and Behavior.Hilary Putnam - 1963 - In Ronald J. Butler (ed.), Analytical Philosophy: Second Series. Blackwell.
Intentions, Actions, and the Self.Suparna Choudhury & Sarah-Jayne Blakemore - 2006 - In Susan Pockett, William P. Banks & Shaun Gallagher (eds.), Does Consciousness Cause Behavior? MIT Press. pp. 39-51.
Intentionality and Intensionality.James W. Cornman - 1962 - Philosophical Quarterly 12 (January):44-52.
Insanity and Responsibility.Herbert Fingarette - 1972 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 15 (1-4):6 – 29.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Are Psychopaths Legally Insane?Anneli Jefferson & Katrina Sifferd - 2018 - European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 14 (1):79-96.
Three Rationales for a Legal Right to Mental Integrity.Thomas Douglas & Lisa Forsberg - 2021 - In S. Ligthart, D. van Toor, T. Kooijmans, T. Douglas & G. Meynen (eds.), Neurolaw: Advances in Neuroscience, Justice and Security. Palgrave Macmillan.
Doing, Allowing, and the State.Adam Omar Hosein - 2014 - Law and Philosophy 33 (2):235-264.
A New Interpretation of the Modern Two-Pronged Tests for Insanity.Johannes Bijlsma - 2018 - Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy 47 (1):29-48.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Insanity and Responsibility.Herbert Fingarette - 1972 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 15 (1-4):6 – 29.
Insanity Legislation.J. R. Hamilton - 1986 - Journal of Medical Ethics 12 (1):13-17.
Beyond Rational Insanity.Hung-Yul So - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:221-227.
The Mad, the Bad, and the Psychopath.Heidi L. Maibom - 2008 - Neuroethics 1 (3):167-184.
Failed Agency and the Insanity Defence.Steve Matthews - 2004 - International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 27:413-424.
The Insanity Plea: Szaszian Ethics and Epistemology.Lee S. Weinberg & Richard E. Vatz - 1982 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 3 (3):417-433.


Added to PP index

Total views
133 ( #82,940 of 2,462,325 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #223,344 of 2,462,325 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes