Due to controversy surrounding the issue of whether VI should be included in consideration of legal insanity, the laws governing legal insanity differ greatly among states and have undergone substantial changes in many jurisdictions. The major reasons for differing views on whether VI should be taken into account when assessing insanity include difficulty in assessing and quantifying VI, difficulty in differentiating it from poorly planned or impulsive acts, and society’s hesitancy to excuse the types of offenses and psychiatric impairments that may lend themselves to a insanity defense due to VI alone. Whether to consider one’s ability to refrain from committing a crime or irresistible impulse, due to mental illness has been one of the primary exculpatory variables. Legal tests for insanity have changed over time and differ by jurisdiction. The topic of volitional impairment (VI) in insanity evaluations has long been a subject of some controversy. Insanity defense, not guilty by reason of insanity, irresistible impulse This paper examines the history of and rationale for a volitional test of insanity and how it is assessed by forensic evaluators. Some evaluators’ reports offered an opinion, but did not adequately explain what data they used to arrive at their conclusion. Many of the forensic evaluators concluded that the VI group was unable to refrain from illegal conduct based on considering a number of factors, including psychiatric symptoms and the defendant’s behavior as related to the offense. Criminal charges were also similar, but the VI group was more likely to have been charged with murder. ![]() Diagnostically, the VI and CI groups were similar. Of the 416 defendants assessed as NCR by the hospitals’ court-appointed evaluators, 44 (11%) were assessed as NCR due to VI alone. During a four-year period, 1,446 defendants underwent in-depth (post screening) evaluations for the NCR plea at Maryland state hospitals. Maryland’s test for a finding of legal insanity (not criminally responsible ) allows a defendant to be found legally insane due to either a lack of appreciation of wrongfulness (cognitive impairment ) or lack of ability to refrain from illegal behavior (volitional impairment ). Hammen is Chief, Systems Operation, Maryland Office of Forensic Services, Jessup, Maryland. Fitch is Maryland Director of Forensic Services, Jessup, Maryland and Ms. Arya is Attending Psychiatrist, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, New Jersey Dr. Donohue is from Forensic Psychiatrist, Delaware Psychiatric Center, New Castle, Deleware Dr. Our drivers, bikers, cyclists and pedestrians are challenged daily by other road users, traffic, road and even weather conditions.By Andrew Donohue, DO Vinay Arya, MD Lawrence Fitch, JD and Debra Hammen, LCSW-Cĭr. Lightning and the Safety of Pedestrians.Safety with Electricity and Preventing Electrocution & Fire.Pedestrian safety from snakes and snake bites.NSRI, WaterWise and Preventing Drowning.Swimming Safely and Advice to Prevent Drowning.Safe storage of chemicals vital to avoid disastrous fires.Safety, Prevention and Treatment from Burns.Rights and Obligations when stopped by a Traffic Officer. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |