Abstract
Our criminal law is premised on this assumption: Because an individual has the ability to choose between socially acceptable and socially unacceptable behavior, he or she can be held responsible for conduct that violates the law. Thus, an individual who chooses to commit a crime is morally blameworthy and therefore an appropriate subject for punishment. The insanity defense developed as a device to exclude from criminal responsibility people whom society views as not blameworthy. A severely mentally disordered individual is not considered blameworthy because he or she lacks the capacity (free will) to form the intent to commit a criminal act.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
M’Naghten’s Case, 10 Clark & Fin. 200, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 (1843).
See statutes compiled in Note, Commitment Following an Insanity Acquittal, 94 Harv. L. Rev. 605 n. 4 (1981)
German & Singer, Punishing the Not Guilty: Hospitalization of Persons Acquitted by Reason of Insanity, 29 Rutgers L. Rev. 1011, 1076–79 (1976); G. Morris, The Insanity Defense: A Blueprint for Legislative Reform 93-94, 97-126 (1975); American Bar Foundation, The Mentally Disabled and the Law 430-43 (table 11.1) (rev. ed.) Brackel & Rock, eds., 1971).
A. Dukay, M.D. et al. Final Report of the Ionia State Hospital Medical Audit Committee 17 (Unpublished Report, 1965). For a more extensive description of “patient activities” as reported in the Ionia Medical Audit, see Morris, Mental Illness and Criminal Commitment in Michigan, 5 U. Mich. J. L. Reform 1, 11–13 (1971).
Wexler, Scoville et al. The Administration of Psychiatric Justice: Theory and Practice in Arizona, 13 Ariz. L. Rev. 1, 235 (1971).
Piperno, Indefinite Commitment in a Mental Hospital for the Criminally Insane: Two Models of Administration of Mental Health, 65 J. Crim. L. & Crim. 520, 526 (1974).
Chambers, Alternatives to Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill: Practical Guides and Constitutional Imperatives, 70 Mich. L. Rev. 1107, 1111 (1972).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1983 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Morris, G. (1983). Acquittal by Reason of Insanity. In: Monahan, J., Steadman, H.J. (eds) Mentally Disordered Offenders. Perspectives in Law & Psychology, vol 6. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0351-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0351-8_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-0353-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-0351-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive