RESUMO
The concept of suicide by cop (SbC) is of interest to psychiatrists, law enforcement professionals, lawyers, and citizens. It is a form of provoked homicide arising from a wish to die. Those who attempt SbC experience more mental illness, substance use, and recent trauma than the general population. This article examines those who attempt SbC and survive the encounters. SbC survivors who threaten or harm police or others may be charged with crimes such as weapons possession, aggravated assault, murder or attempted murder of an officer. The formulation of a provocative act, however, frustrates attempts at defenses based on mental state, resulting in few requests for expert testimony. Few data exist on how these individuals fare in court. Appellate cases in which defendants attempted to introduce evidence of SbC illustrate great variability in adjudication. Psychiatric defenses, such as diminished capacity and insanity, are usually inapplicable or unsuccessful because intent and knowledge of wrongfulness are implied in the provocative act. Diversion of SbC defendants into mental health courts is rare because of firearms use against police. The author argues that criminal justice ignores SbC survivors' mental health and recommends application of therapeutic jurisprudence to give full expression of SbC dynamics.
Assuntos
Transtornos Psicóticos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Suicídio , Humanos , Direito Penal , Suicídio/psicologia , Homicídio/psicologiaRESUMO
All American jurisdictions have laws protecting children from abuse and neglect. Mandated reporters, including health professionals, whether their suspicions ultimately are substantiated or unfounded, are entitled to immunity when their reports are entered in good faith. When harm takes the form of medical child abuse (MCA, also known as Munchausen syndrome by proxy or factitious disorder imposed on another), its origin is ambiguous, at least initially. Questions arise as to whether the caregiver intended to deceive medical professionals and if the condition improved when the child was separated from the caregiver. Clinicians may have an obligation to report MCA in difficult-to-diagnose cases or those where parents press for hospitalizations and procedures. Substantiated cases may lead to removal of children from homes and criminal prosecution of parents. This can result in backlash against the reporter by the parents, with claims of malpractice, official misconduct, intentional harm, fraud or conspiracy to commit fraud, defamation (libel or slander), or all of the above. This article examines case law regarding alleged departures from good-faith reporting of MCA and explores potential limitations to immunity provided to mandated reporters. The findings include no significant instances in which the immunity shield for good-faith reporting was pierced.
Assuntos
Maus-Tratos Infantis , Transtornos Autoinduzidos , Síndrome de Munchausen , Criança , Humanos , Estados Unidos , HospitalizaçãoRESUMO
In implementing the decisions in the landmark case Sell v. United States, jurisdictions have adopted mechanisms for the involuntary medication of defendants to restore competency to stand trial. These procedures attempt to balance the liberty and privacy rights of the accused against the government's responsibility to ensure timely prosecution and fair trial. The question of which medications are most appropriate for this goal, however, remains open. This article reviews the legal status of the administration of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics for sustained competency restoration. We explore case law and discuss the theoretical and empirical benefits and drawbacks to this practice, considering recent technological advancements in LAI development. Some courts have regarded LAI use pursuant to Sell as equivalent or superior to immediate-acting medications, whereas others have regarded LAIs as either more intrusive or medically riskier. We conclude that the use of LAIs may be carefully integrated into treatment plans to restore and maintain trial competency amid competing interests.
Assuntos
Compensação e Reparação/legislação & jurisprudência , Psiquiatria Legal/métodos , Jurisprudência , Transtornos Mentais/reabilitação , Resiliência Psicológica , Estresse Psicológico/diagnóstico , Experiências Adversas da Infância , Alostase , Humanos , Plasticidade Neuronal , Prognóstico , Recuperação de Função FisiológicaRESUMO
The right to bodily self-determination has a firm foothold in American jurisprudence and legislation. Since the early 20th century, courts have consistently upheld individuals' rights to govern their bodies, citing the constitutional right to privacy and importance of individual autonomy. After these decisions, the advance directive has become an essential way to express personal preferences after incapacity for decision-making, especially in end-of-life scenarios. Can sexual preferences survive cognitive incapacity as well? When individuals lose the capacity to voice sexual needs and preferences, there is no mechanism to protect sexual expression. Dementia's ability to render individuals legally incapable of consenting to sexual activity was the focus of the case of Iowa legislator Henry Rayhons. The state charged Mr. Rayhons with assault for alleged sexual interactions with his wife, who had Alzheimer's disease. The prosecution failed to prove its case. We propose a hypothetical sexual advance directive as a theoretical mechanism to assert sexual desire past incapacity, grounded in claims regarding the possible importance of sex for individuals with neurocognitive disorders. Forensic psychiatrists can play a unique role in the creation and implementation of such a tool.
Assuntos
Demência/psicologia , Competência Mental/legislação & jurisprudência , Comportamento Sexual , Idoso , Envelhecimento , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Sexualidade , Cônjuges , Estados UnidosRESUMO
The assessment and trial of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik, including disparate opinions about his sanity, raise questions about distinguishing "bad" from "mad." Although he was ultimately found criminally responsible, the tenacity and pervasiveness of his beliefs suggested delusional thinking. The author reflects on the difficulty psychiatrists have with nomenclature generally and on the application of imprecise classification to criminal justice. Ideally, a classification system should "carve nature at its joints." Barring that, psychiatry needs operational definitions to appreciate the differences between idiosyncratic, psychotic thinking, and shared subcultural beliefs or ideologies. The concept of extreme overvalued belief provides a basis for making this distinction, when applied in the criminal justice context.
Assuntos
Criminosos/psicologia , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Psiquiatria Legal , Transtornos Mentais/classificação , Direito Penal , Cultura , Homicídio , Defesa por Insanidade , Noruega , Terminologia como AssuntoRESUMO
Hoarding of objects, trash, or animals has the potential to harm hoarders and others. Law enforcement and civil concerns arise, leading to situations ranging from health code violations to child abuse and potential eviction proceedings. DSM-5 included hoarding disorder among the obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. This change has created an opportunity for individuals who engage in severe hoarding to request reasonable accommodation from landlords, because their condition represents a disability under the Fair Housing and Americans with Disabilities Acts. We review the legal implications of hoarding disorder, tracking recent case law and arguments made in such disputes.
Assuntos
Manual Diagnóstico e Estatístico de Transtornos Mentais , Pessoas com Deficiência/legislação & jurisprudência , Transtorno de Acumulação , Habitação/legislação & jurisprudência , Aplicação da Lei , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
The American justice system traditionally has relied on expert witnesses hired by adverse parties, resulting in the appearance of dueling hired guns. There have been attempts to reform the system through court-appointed impartial experts, but trial attorneys have resisted them. Celebrated cases have brought the problem to the forefront--for example, the 1924 murder trial of Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold, Jr, in Chicago. These young men were on trial for kidnapping and killing a teenage boy. That there was no motive but thrill-seeking incensed citizens, who called for their death. Several psychiatrists testified at the penalty phase. The judge sentenced the defendants to life in prison, ostensibly because of their age. Commenting on the case, John H. Wigmore, Dean of Northwestern Law School and authority on evidence, critiqued the system of partisan experts. This article contains a reprint of his editorial and a discussion of it in the context of evolving expert testimony standards. My conclusion is that a robust but honest airing of opinions is most helpful in criminal cases and that court-appointed experts may be more appropriate in civil and domestic relations matters.
Assuntos
Conflito de Interesses/legislação & jurisprudência , Prova Pericial/legislação & jurisprudência , Psiquiatria Legal/história , Homicídio/história , História do Século XX , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovemRESUMO
The landmark case Frye v. United States is associated with the general-acceptance standard for admissibility of scientific evidence. The standard, still the law in some jurisdictions, has largely been replaced by one based on Federal Rule of Evidence 702. Although it is known from the 1923 Frye opinion's terse wording that the science in question was a systolic blood pressure deception test, the facts behind the case and the story of the device's inventor are rarely discussed. In this article we review the story of the defendant, James Alphonso Frye, and the psychologist, William Moulton Marston, who claimed he could prove that Frye had confessed falsely. The case continues to reverberate whenever scientific evidence makes a claim of finding the truth.