PSYCH DB and 2 replies due Tues Dec 11

Read Comer: ch. 16 and watch the related presentations in the Module/Week 8 Reading & Study folder.  Review some of the famous Insanity Defense Cases in page 495 of your textbook.  What is your explanation of the abnormal behavior (e.g., biological, emotional, spiritual)?  What are some concerns about the Insanity Defense, what is your view, and why do you hold it?

Discussion should be at least two hundred to two hundred fifty words. Replies should be at least 100 words. Two replies are required.

Candice,

As far as my view concerning abnormal behavior is concerned, I believe it is closely related to all mentioned; biological, emotional and the spiritual. On the emotional side of things, feelings can become so severe, that it can cause one to demonstrate abnormal behavior. For instance, there are stress like disorder like post partum psychosis that effect usually new mothers which are brought on by the emotional pressures and new responsibilities. This disorder has been known for causing some to be abnormal in their behavior activity. In the biological sense, because we are genetically inclined, some people who are closely related to relatives that have suffered from abnormal behavior disorders are often at higher risk for developing abnormalities themselves. Now when it comes to the spiritual aspect, I believe that just like we fight against genetic disorders, we are also in spiritual battles, concerning generational curse. The bible speaks of in Romans 12:2 (NIV),“not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind”, and so by this we see that because of the fall we became subjected to sin which then produced abnormal behavior within many.

 

Roseanne,

I can see why the “not guilty by reason of insanity” verdicts are so controversial. Many of the famous insanity defense cases were highly publicized, hotly debated, and some of the verdicts were later overturned (Comer, 2011). It is difficult to know for sure if a person that committed a crime should be punished or should receive mental health treatment because they did not know what they did was wrong. I believe the abnormal behavior can be caused by any of the several different factors, depending on each individual case. However, I think for most people, this behavior is caused by a combination of factors. For example, I think most defendants involved in an Insanity Defense case have some kind of biological abnormality, such as a genetic tendency toward or a chemical imbalance in the brain accounting for a mental illness. Most defendants probably also have something else going on in their lives that caused them to be particularly vulnerable, such as emotional distress, family or marital stress, or spiritual depravity.

 One of the concerns I have about the Insanity Defense is that I feel there is no way to have strict enough criteria to let off only those who truly need mental health treatment rather than a prison sentence, and at the same time, to not punish those who truly have a mental illness but no previous diagnosis or treatment history. I also agree with one of the criticisms described in our text, that it seems “clinical knowledge in some areas may be too incomplete to be allowed to influence important legal decisions” (Comer, 2011, p. 494). If several experts that are testifying disagree with one another about the defendant’s mental state, how can we know for sure which opinion is correct?”

 Despite some of the concerns with the Insanity Defense, I think it is important to have that option in place because many people with a mental illness desperately need help and mental health treatment, not time in prison. I think prison would only hurt them or confuse them, but not rehabilitate them. I agree mostly with the M’Naghten rule, “that people should be found not guilty by reason of insanity only if they did not know right from wrong at the time of the crime” (Comer, 2011, p. 493). However, this is difficult to determine because a diagnosis alone does not mean an individual did not know what they were doing—a mental illness may play a part in the crime, but perhaps is not fully responsible (Hall, Lee, & Miraglia, 2011). In addition, because symptoms change over time, even if an individual has delusions and does not know right from wrong at the time of trial, that does not mean they did not know right from wrong at the time of the crime (Hall, Lee, & Miraglia, 2011).

Psalm 22:24 says, “For he has not despised or scorned
the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help”

(NIV). I think the justice system needs to continue to listen to the cries for help from those who are suffering from a mental illness. It is not easy, but we must do our best to determine which individuals knew what they did was wrong and which individuals need hospitalization or treatment.

 

Comer, R. J. (2011). Fundamentals of abnormal psychology, 6th ed. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.  

Hall, D. L., Lee, L.-W. G., & Miraglia, R. P. (2011, Spring). The increasingly blurred line between "mad" and "bad": treating personality disorders in the prison setting. Albany Law Review, 74(3), 1277+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com .ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA269432316&v=2.1&u=vic_liberty&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w (accessed December 8, 2012).

My concern with the insanity defense is that there are by far too many cases tried in court that use defenses for insanity when the client is by no means insane. This defense appears to be the most popular amongst lawyers in high profile murder cases. I think that for people who try to use the plea of insanity defense, thorough clinical evaluation should already be done or have some signs of mental illness beforehand. I agree with the courts in the decision that, “in some instances people who suffer from severe mental instability, may not be responsible for their actions”, (comer, 2011, p.492). In such cases, these people who are otherwise already declared mentally unstable, a defense of such would be more believable in my opinion. I hold to this view because under such conditions when criminal commitment occurs, treatment will be adequately given and provided for those who need it, not for others who do not. One particular form of criminal commitment I also do not agree with is the fact that individuals are judged mentally unstable at the time of their cries and so innocent of wrong doing (comer, 2011, p.492). These types of laws make it very easy for those who are intentional cold blooded killers to get off free of being accused of any crime. And this type of negligence happens in everyday court. And so I ask you, where is the justice in that?

 

References

Comer, R. J. (2011). Fundamentals of Abnormal Psychology. New York, NY: Worth.