Rationality Was Lost on the United States Supreme Court in Its Kohler Decision

被引:2
|
作者
Felthous, Alan R. [1 ]
机构
[1] St Louis Univ, Sch Med, Dept Psychiat & Behav Neurosci, Forens Psychiat Div, St Louis, MO 63104 USA
关键词
insanity defense; rationality; criminal responsibility; mens rea defense; MENTAL-DISORDER; INSANITY; RECIDIVISM;
D O I
10.29158/JAAPL.210054-21
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
In its recent Kahler decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Kansas' abolition of the state's insanity defense was constitutional. It did so by framing the matter as a choice between the state's mens rea defense and a moral capacity defense, then mischaracterizing the mens rea defense as a type of insanity defense. In analyzing the two approaches, the Court missed the fundamental importance of rationality in criminal mental responsibility, a constitutional requirement for other criminal competencies, and a condition well described in the Court's Panetti ruling. The Court's acceptance of the abolition of a special insanity defense is a public policy in the direction of further criminalizing and punishing rather than providing prompt and proper treatment to those with serious mental illness, at a time when increasing modern research demonstrates the success of insanity acquittee dispositions with improved treatment and management resulting in lower rates of relapse and criminal recidivism.
引用
收藏
页码:97 / 105
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条