Insanity Defense

insanity

insanity, mental disorder of such severity as to render its victim incapable of managing his affairs or of conforming to social standards. Today, the term insanity is used chiefly in criminal law, to denote mental aberrations or defects that may relieve a person from the legal consequences of his or her acts. The case of Daniel McNaughtan, who was found not guilty by reason of insanity after making an assassination attempt on British prime minister Robert Peel (1834), gave rise to the modern insanity defense used in many Western nations today. In the United States, the 1954 case of Durham v. the United States led to the establishment of new rules for testing defendants. Today, psychologists may perform tests to determine whether or not the defendant is mentally stable. Such tests try to ascertain whether or not a defendant can distinguish right from wrong, and whether or not he acted on an "irresistible impulse." John Hinckley's assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan (1981) became another landmark in the history of the insanity defense. The court's initial verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" generated public outcry and renewed interest in the verdict of "guilty but mentally ill," which is permissible in some states. This verdict allows defendants deemed mentally ill to be hospitalized but requires them to carry out a reasonable prison sentence as well. In 1983, the Supreme Court ruled it permissable to keep a mentally ill defendant hospitalized for a term longer than the maximum sentence for the crime with which the defendant was charged. Many have contended that the insanity defense is nothing more than a legal loophole, allowing serious criminals to escape imprisonment. In fact, the plea is rarely employed in the United States, and it is estimated that less than 1% of defendants have used it successfully. Recent years have seen the restrictions surrounding insanity defense considerably narrowed, with the sole criteria for a successful plea being the determination of whether or not the defendant knew he was breaking the law.

See R. Simon and D. Aaronson, The Insanity Defense (1988); R. Porter, A Social History of Madness: The World Through the Eyes of the Insane (1989).

The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright© 2017, The Columbia University Press.

Insanity Defense: Selected full-text books and articles

Insanity Defense: Past, Present, and Future By Math, Suresh; Kumar, Channaveerachari; Moirangthem, Sydney Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, Vol. 37, No. 4, October-December 2015
PEER-REVIEWED PERIODICAL
Peer-reviewed publications on Questia are publications containing articles which were subject to evaluation for accuracy and substance by professional peers of the article's author(s).
Rationality, Insanity, and the Insanity Defense: Reflections on the Limits of Reason By Blumoff, Theodore Y Law and Psychology Review, Vol. 39, Annual 2015
The Uneasy Entente between Legal Insanity and Mens Rea: Beyond Clark V. Arizona By Morse, Stephen J.; Hoffman, Morris B Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 97, No. 4, Summer 2007
Offenders, Deviants or Patients? By Herschel Prins Routledge, 2005 (3rd edition)
Librarian's tip: Especially Chap. 1 "Not in Their Right Minds"
Psychiatry By Allan Tasman; Jerald Kay; Jeffrey A. Lieberman; Michael B. First; Mario Maj John Wiley, vol.1&2, 2008 (3rd edition)
Librarian's tip: "Criminal Responsibility and the Insanity Defense" begins on p. 89
'My Brain Made Me Do It'-How Neuroscience May Change the Insanity Defence By Kaliski, Sean Z South African Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2009
PEER-REVIEWED PERIODICAL
Peer-reviewed publications on Questia are publications containing articles which were subject to evaluation for accuracy and substance by professional peers of the article's author(s).
By Reason of Insanity By Silverstein, Ken Mother Jones, Vol. 26, No. 5, September/October 2001
Gender Matters in the Insanity Defense By Breheney, Christian; Groscup, Jennifer; Galietta, Michele Law and Psychology Review, Vol. 31, Annual 2007
This Is Insane! By Paquette, Mary Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, Vol. 38, No. 3, July-September 2002
PEER-REVIEWED PERIODICAL
Peer-reviewed publications on Questia are publications containing articles which were subject to evaluation for accuracy and substance by professional peers of the article's author(s).
Asphalt Justice: A Critique of the Criminal Justice System in America By John Raymond Cook Praeger, 2001
Librarian's tip: Chap. 8 "Insanity and Mental Health"
Looking for a topic idea? Use Questia's Topic Generator
Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.