Insanity Defense

docx

School

University of Florida *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

4184

Subject

Sociology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by HighnessRam7334

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 1 Isabel Jurado-Blanco Dr. Feihong Wang CLP 3144 9 April 2023 The Insanity Defense The insanity defense is a legal defense used in criminal trials where the defendant claims that they were not responsible for their actions because of a mental illness. It is based on the idea that individuals who suffer from a severe mental illness at the time of the crime should not be held fully responsible for their actions. The values of the insanity defense include providing a fair and just legal system that recognizes the importance of mental illness and mental health in criminal cases. It also ensures that individuals not fully responsible for their actions are not unfairly punished for crimes they did not fully comprehend. However, the insanity defense also poses several problems, including the difficulty in determining the defendant's mental state at the time of the crime and the potential for abuse by defendants who may fake or exaggerate their mental illness. There are several insanity defense rules, including the M'Naghten rule, the irresistible impulse rule, the Durham rule, and the Model Penal Code rule. The M'Naghten rule, used in most jurisdictions, requires the defendant to show that at the time of the crime, they did not understand the nature and quality of their actions or did not know that their actions were wrong due to a mental illness or defect. The irresistible impulse rule is like the M'Naghten rule but also considers the defendant's ability to control their actions at the time of the offense. The Durham

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 2 rule focuses on whether the crime was a product of the defendant's mental illness or defect, and the Model Penal Code rule combines elements of the M'Naghten and irresistible impulse rules. John Hinckley is an American who attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan and three others in 1981 outside a Washington D.C. hotel and successfully used the insanity defense. (Melton, Petrila, Poythress, & Slobogin, 2018). He shot President Reagan, Press Secretary James Brady, a Secret Service agent, and a police officer before being subdued by law enforcement. The shooting happened on March 30, 1981, outside the Hilton Washington Hotel. Hinckley's defense team argued that he suffered from severe mental illness (major depression and schizophrenia) and believed that the shooting would impress actress Jodie Foster, whom he was obsessed with (Binder, McNiel, & Vos, 2010). The court applied the irresistible impulse rule and found that Hinckley's mental illness prevented him from controlling his actions at the time of the offense. As a result, Hinckley was found not guilty by reason of insanity and was confined to a mental institution. After years of treatment, he was eventually released in 2016. My instinctual reaction is that the court made the right decision based on everything that was brought in by the defense team. Having depression and schizophrenia makes a person unfit to be charged with murder since the person does not have a clear sense of what is real and not real. With schizophrenia people have delusions and hallucinations and this impairs a person’s day-to-day life. If someone has a disorder that prevents them from having proper cognitive functioning, then they should be taken to a mental institution for them to address these issues accordingly.

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 3 Furthermore, based on Hinckley’s case let's discuss the rights of society and individuals. According to Van der Kolk and McFarlane (2012), "trauma can affect both the individual and society, leading to a range of negative outcomes" (p. 45). Furthermore, "the legal system must protect the rights of both society and individuals" (Cohen & Peterson, 2009, p. 32). There is a relationship between the rights of society and the rights of individuals. On one hand, society has the right to protect its citizens from harm, and this is often accomplished using law enforcement. On the other hand, individuals have the right to due process and a fair trial, as well as protection from undue harm by the state. The balance between these two rights is a delicate one that requires careful consideration and the development of legal frameworks that can adequately address both concerns. One example of this balance is the concept of Guilty But Mentally Ill (GBMI), which refers to the legal designation of a defendant who has been found guilty of a crime, but also has a mental illness. This designation allows for the defendant to receive treatment for their mental illness while serving their sentence and can also affect the severity of their punishment. Critics of GBMI argue that it is an imperfect solution, as it does not fully address the issue of mental illness within the criminal justice system. For example, some individuals may be wrongly diagnosed as mentally ill, leading to inappropriate treatment or punishment. Additionally, GBMI can also be seen as a way to avoid addressing the root causes of criminal behavior, such as poverty, lack of education, and social inequality. However, proponents of GBMI argue that it is a necessary solution for addressing the complex issue of mental illness within the criminal justice system. They argue that without this designation, mentally ill defendants may not receive the

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

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 4 treatment they need to recover and reintegrate into society, leading to a cycle of incarceration and recidivism. Moreover, the law and mental health profession have different perspectives regarding their systems. According to the Abnormal Psychology textbook by Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, there are two main differences between the perspectives of the law and the mental health profession: each system's goal and the required standard of evidence. The primary goal of the legal system is to determine guilt or innocence and to apply punishment or consequences for criminal behavior. The mental health profession, on the other hand, aims to diagnose, treat, and prevent mental disorders in individuals, to promote mental health and well-being. Another difference between the two perspectives is the standard of evidence required. The legal system requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a high standard that requires evidence to be compelling and conclusive. In contrast, the mental health profession relies on a preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower standard that only requires evidence to be more likely than not. These differences in perspective can lead to conflict between the legal system and the mental health profession when dealing with individuals with mental disorders who have committed crimes. For example, the legal system may view such individuals as solely responsible for their actions and may impose punishment accordingly, while the mental health profession may view their actions as a manifestation of their mental illness and recommend treatment rather than punishment.

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 5 To address these issues, a more integrated and complex view of mental disorders by the legal system is necessary. This view should recognize that mental disorders can influence behavior and decision-making, but that individuals with mental disorders are still responsible for their actions. It should also consider the potential benefits of mental health treatment, such as reducing the risk of future criminal behavior, while still recognizing the importance of punishment for criminal acts. One way to achieve this integrated view is using specialized mental health courts, which can provide a more individualized and comprehensive approach to dealing with individuals with mental disorders who have committed crimes. These courts can incorporate mental health professionals into the legal process, ensuring that the individual's mental health needs are addressed while still holding them accountable for their actions. Additionally, they can offer alternative sentencing options, such as community service or mental health treatment, that can be more effective in addressing the underlying causes of criminal behavior.

Jurado-Blanco, Isabel 6 References Binder, R. L., McNiel, D. E., & Vos, M. E. (2010). The impact of the John Hinckley verdict on the use of the insanity defense. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 38(3), 319-325. Cohen, L., & Peterson, A. (2009). The balance between individual rights and societal interests: An analysis of the guilty but mentally ill plea. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 9(1), 32-43. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2018). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (4th ed.). Guilford Publications. Van der Kolk, B., & McFarlane, A. C. (2012). The black hole of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 25(1), 45-55.

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

Related Documents

CJ 340 Module Four Journal.docx

BEHS 103 PROGRESS REPORT Assigment..docx

homework 5 soc 10B 2023.doc

Women’s Gynecologic Health 3rd Edition 9781284076028.pdf

edsp622dbw1.docx

HAT proposal BYRNE ECPY363.docx

Critical Reflection #3.docx

Sofia Marquez Critical Reflection #1.pdf

Critical Reflection 2.docx

PSC7102 Week 2 Theory Assignment.docx

PSC7102 Week 1 Family Theory Assumptions Reflection.docx

PSC7000 Week 7 Application Analysis Coalition Planning.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Social Psychology (10th Edition)

Sociology

ISBN:9780134641287

Author:Elliot Aronson, Timothy D. Wilson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers

Publisher:Pearson College Div

Introduction to Sociology (Eleventh Edition)

Sociology

ISBN:9780393639407

Author:Deborah Carr, Anthony Giddens, Mitchell Duneier, Richard P. Appelbaum

Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company

The Basics of Social Research (MindTap Course Lis...

Sociology

ISBN:9781305503076

Author:Earl R. Babbie

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Scien...

Sociology

ISBN:9780134477596

Author:Saferstein, Richard

Publisher:PEARSON

Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach (13th Edition)

Sociology

ISBN:9780134205571

Author:James M. Henslin

Publisher:PEARSON

Society: The Basics (14th Edition)

Sociology

ISBN:9780134206325

Author:John J. Macionis

Publisher:PEARSON

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Social Psychology (10th Edition)
Sociology
ISBN:9780134641287
Author:Elliot Aronson, Timothy D. Wilson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers
Publisher:Pearson College Div
Introduction to Sociology (Eleventh Edition)
Sociology
ISBN:9780393639407
Author:Deborah Carr, Anthony Giddens, Mitchell Duneier, Richard P. Appelbaum
Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company
The Basics of Social Research (MindTap Course Lis...
Sociology
ISBN:9781305503076
Author:Earl R. Babbie
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Scien...
Sociology
ISBN:9780134477596
Author:Saferstein, Richard
Publisher:PEARSON
Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach (13th Edition)
Sociology
ISBN:9780134205571
Author:James M. Henslin
Publisher:PEARSON
Society: The Basics (14th Edition)
Sociology
ISBN:9780134206325
Author:John J. Macionis
Publisher:PEARSON