The Journal of Psychiatry & Law

Thirty men who were found not guilty by reason of insanity were compared to 30 men who relied on the defense but were found guilty, and with 30 men who were evaluated for the defense but opted to plea bargain. Demographic and psychological test data were obtained for each subject. There was significant psychopathology found across groups, more suggestive of major mental illness than of psychopathy. When data on the heinousness of each individual crime were examined, NGRI subjects were found to commit the least heinous offenses, and those on death row were found to commit the most heinous. Directions for future research and the operation of the legal system in general are discussed.

Arguments regarding the credibility of psychologists’ and psychiatrists’ expert testimony are commonly restricted to impressions about whether claims to special reasoning powers or capabilities are justified or not. The large, but often neglected body of research on human judgment provides a means for analyzing these claims scientifically. Systematic review shows that claims for the beneficial effects of experience and practice on judgment accuracy, the clinician's powers of data integration, the ability to utilize clinical impression, and the capacity to detect malingering have little evidence and extensive counterevidence. Caution is advised in using these claims to bolster one's credibility.

Behaving as a child advocate during expert testimony in family court can introduce sources of bias and distortion into a clinician's conclusions and reduce the extent to which the professional appears “scientific.” However, child advocacy within the justice system can be viewed as a professional responsibility for clinicians working with youths. This article operationally defines child advocacy. It outlines theoretical parameters of acceptable advocacy during testimony that can be used by clinicians during pretrial self-assessment of their anticipated statements to the court.

The Tarasoff case established that a psychotherapist has a legal obligation to breach a patient's confidence in certain circumstances. The subsequent judicial expansion of the original Tarasoff doctrine raises additional legal issues that confront a psychotherapist in a Tarasoff-type dilemma where the law holds the protection of third parties outweighs the patient's right to confidentiality.

The 50 states were surveyed to determine the operative insanity rule and frequency and success of the insanity plea. Reflecting the dearth of information regarding this important public policy concern, only a limited number of jurisdictions could provide statistics on the plea's frequency and success. Among these, incidence of the plea was generally low, while its success rate was quite variable.

This article seeks to reveal how psychoanalytic insights and discoveries can help in evaluating and reforming the law of evidence. Examined are the oath that witnesses take, the view that the effects of prejudicial evidence can be overcome by a judge's instructions to a jury to disregard it, the “opinion evidence” rule and its logically indefensible distinction between “fact” and “opinion” evidence, and the failure of the hypothetical question to live up to its promise as a vehicle for expert testimony. Also considered in light of psychoanalytic concepts and discoveries is the much-mooted hearsay rule and three of its major exceptions: “excited utterances, ” “declarations against interest, ” and “admissions. ” Throughout, reforms are suggested that, it is hoped, will increase the soundness and effectiveness of evidentiary law.

The entrance of the United States Supreme Court into the field of mental health law in the last decade has been seen by some as heralding a commitment of the Court to mental health issues. A review of key cases reveals a disjointed approach to the issues with an ambivalence and inconsistency in the viewpoint taken toward the role and efficacy of psychiatry. While some cases have emphasized individual rights, such as incompetency issues, and a newly created right to psychiatric assistance at trial for indigents, other cases have refused to give psychiatric treatment centers the right to administer treatment without at least administrative if not judicial supervision. The cases reveal the lack of an overall jurisprudential viewpoint, and perhaps even a trend to return to the level of letting each state go its own way.

In the last decade, wife abuse has become one of society's most severe social problems. As the frequency of wife beating increases, the complexities of this issue remain enigmatic. In order to alleviate the continuing spread of this deviant behavior, inquiry must be focused on the kind of men who beat their wives, the kind of women who become battered wives, why the battered woman remains with her assailant, and how society keeps her in this abusive environment. As society grows increasingly aware of this problem, the frequency of the events of wife abuse may begin to decline.