PSY 622 Week Four Discussion
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
622
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by KidKangaroo4663
Hello everyone,
The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 (IDRA) was signed into law by President Ronald
Reagan on October 12, 1984, amending the United States federal laws governing defendants
with mental diseases or defects to make it significantly more difficult to obtain a verdict of not
guilty only by reason of insanity (Psychology, 2016). However, before the IDRA was enacted the
Model Penal Code, and the M'Naghten Rule were used to address insanity of individuals within
the courtroom. The Model Penal Code categorizes criminal intent into four states of mind listed
in order of culpability: purposely, knowingly, recklessly, and negligently (Criminal Law, 2015).
Whereas the M'Naghten Rule focuses on whether the defendant knew right from wrong or the
nature of the crime when it was committed (Findlaw, 2019). After the trial of United States v.
Hinckley in 1982 these standards were criticized due to John Hinckley Jr. attempting to assassin
President Ronald Regan (Psychology, 2016). It was also determined by Congress that just
because an individual has a mental illness does not warrant them for an insanity defense
(Psychology, 2016). Which I believe is beneficial in the sense that just because an individual has
a mental illness does not mean that they can go and commit a crime and that they would be
handed an insanity plea which often results in a decreased sentence. Since it is so difficult to
truly prove that an individual is actually insane, it is the responsibility of the defendant and the
attorney to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt (Psychology, 2016). Today this is significant
because mental health professionals are required to develop more reliable and valid assessments
to truly prove that the defendant is insane. This act also led to forensic psychologists providing
expert testimony and an assessment regarding the patient's mental state.
Two offender risk tools that would be preferred in my offender rehabilitation program would be
the Violence Risk Scale (VRS) and the Classification of Violence Risk (COVR). The VRS was
developed by Wong and Gordon between 1999 and 2003 (Lewis et al., 2012). This type of
assessment tool consists of 6 static and 20 dynamic variables that are used to assess the risk of
violent re-offending for incarcerated individuals as well as forensic psychiatric patients
considered for access to the community (Lewis et al., 2012). It can be used to monitor variations
in risk and motivation to change and it can also assess violence risk, criminogenic need, client
responsivity, and treatment changes (Lewis et al., 2012). The score that defendant gets on the
VRS indicates the level of violence risk which would be beneficial to determine which level of
treatment the individual needs such as inpatient, outpatient, group therapy, individual therapy,
etc. The COVR is a self-report interactive software program that aims to estimate the level of
violence risk posed by individuals diagnosed with a mental disorder over a period of several
months, post-discharge into the community (Monahan et al., 2006). The tool assesses patients on
44 risk factors in estimating violence risk (Monahan et al., 2006). This type of assessment was
generated from data that was constructed using the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study
(Monahan et al., 2006). When utilizing the COVR caution should be used when predicting risk
until more empirical research supports these findings, especially with high-risk individuals
(Monahan et al., 2006).
I think that both the VRS and the COVR take race and ethnicity into consideration. Collectively
valid risk factors that are candidates for inclusion pertain to the individual's age, gender,
ethnicity, race, and personality. Additionally, the individual's diagnosis of a personality disorder,
major mental disorder, and substance abuse order. Further, the crime that the individual has
committed and their history of violence, and considering whether they were raised being
physically victimized or in a pathological family environment. Since the COVR is a self-report
program I feel that this would be most likely geared towards the individual who is taking the
assessments race and ethnicity into consideration.
References
Criminal Law. (2015, December 17).
4.2 criminal
intent
.
https://open.lib.umn.edu/criminallaw/chapter/4-2-criminal-intent/
Findlaw. (2019, February 20).
The m’naghten rule
.
https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-
procedure/the-m-naghten-rule.html
Lewis, K., Olver, M., & Wong, S. (2012, May).
(PDF) The Violence Risk Scale: Predictive
validity and linking changes in Risk with Violent Recidivism in a Sample of High- Risk Offenders
with Psychopathic Traits
. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224897605_The_Violence_Risk_Scale_Predictive_Vali
dity_and_Linking_Changes_in_Risk_With_Violent_Recidivism_in_a_Sample_of_High-
Risk_Offenders_With_Psychopathic_Traits.
Monahan, J., Appelbaum, P., Grisso, T., & Steadman, H. (2006, November).
classification of
violence risk (COVR)
. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6627824_Classification_of_Violence_Risk_COVR
Monahan , J. (2013, September 4).
A Jurisprudence of Risk Assessment: Forecasting Harm
among Prisoners, Predators, and Patients
. Virginia Law Review.
https://www.virginialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Schragger_Book.pdf
Psychology. (2016, May 31).
Insanity defense reform act
.
https://psychology.iresearchnet.com/forensic-psychology/criminal-responsibility/insanity-
defense-reform-act/
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help