1999Unpublished venueRequires access

Anglo-American Insanity Defence Reform: The War Between Law and Medicine

Faye Boland

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

This work sets out to show that all attempts at reformulating insanity have been surrounded by controversy. This is because of the insanity defence's foundation on a rigid distinction between responsibility (sanity) and irresponsibility (insanity) - a distinction at odds with psychiatric theory. The author examines the diminished responsibility defence and its success in abating the medico-legal controversy surrounding the insanity defence. This is achieved by adopting a multi-jurisdictional approach (American, Irish and English developments are examined) and by exploring legal, medical and socio-legal historical writings on this subject.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This work sets out to show that all attempts at reformulating insanity have been surrounded by controversy. This is because of the insanity defence's foundation on a rigid distinction between responsibility (sanity) and irresponsibility (insanity) - a distinction at odds with psychiatric theory. The author examines the diminished responsibility defence and its success in abating the medico-legal controversy surrounding the insanity defence. This is achieved by adopting a multi-jurisdictional approach (American, Irish and English developments are examined) and by exploring legal, medical and socio-legal historical writings on this subject.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This work sets out to show that all attempts at reformulating insanity have been surrounded by controversy. This is because of the insanity defence's foundation on a rigid distinction between responsibility (sanity) and irresponsibility (insanity) - a distinction at odds with psychiatric theory. The author examines the diminished responsibility defence and its success in abating the medico-legal controversy surrounding the insanity defence. This is achieved by adopting a multi-jurisdictional approach (American, Irish and English developments are examined) and by exploring legal, medical and socio-legal historical writings on this subject.

Key concepts: Sanity, Insanity, Insanity defense, Law, Subject (documents), Political science, Criminal responsibility, Criminology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Anglo-American Insanity Defence Reform: The War Between Law and Medicine — Research Paper | ScholarLens