Dissociation and the insanity defense: A review of U.S. Federal appellate case law
- PMID: 38876483
- DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.15567
Dissociation and the insanity defense: A review of U.S. Federal appellate case law
Abstract
Pathological dissociation is relatively common in the United States and may be associated with violent or criminal behavior. Dissociative Disorders, especially Dissociative Identity Disorder, are considered controversial diagnoses by some in the psychiatric and legal professions. Individuals who offend during dissociative states may not be criminally responsible if they meet the legal standard for insanity, however, insanity pleas based on dissociative symptoms are rare. This review examined Federal appellate case law for potential legal barriers to the insanity defense for dissociative conditions and any restrictions imposed on related expert evidence. Few rulings directly addressed these questions but there do not appear to be any unique barriers for dissociation-related insanity pleas. Some cases provided valuable insights regarding the admission of expert evidence, effective expert testimony, and the role of defense counsel.
Keywords: automatism; burden of proof; dissociation; dissociative disorders; forensic psychiatry; insanity defense; multiple personality; trauma; unconsciousness.
© 2024 American Academy of Forensic Sciences.
Similar articles
-
AAPL practice guideline for forensic psychiatric evaluation of defendants raising the insanity defense. American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2002;30(2 Suppl):S3-40. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2002. PMID: 12099305
-
PTSD as a criminal defense: a review of case law.J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2012;40(4):509-21. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2012. PMID: 23233473 Review.
-
Forensic psychiatric testimony under the Federal Rules of Evidence.Leg Med. 1995:241-60. Leg Med. 1995. PMID: 8788672 No abstract available.
-
Psychopathic disorders and criminal responsibility in the USA.Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010 Nov;260 Suppl 2:S137-41. doi: 10.1007/s00406-010-0136-8. Epub 2010 Oct 9. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010. PMID: 20936297 Review.
-
Getting away with murder? Dissociative states and criminal responsibility.Int J Law Psychiatry. 1998 Spring;21(2):163-76. doi: 10.1016/s0160-2527(98)00006-5. Int J Law Psychiatry. 1998. PMID: 9612716 Review. No abstract available.
References
REFERENCES
-
- American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2022.
-
- During EH, Elahi FM, Taieb O, Moro MR, Baubet T. A critical review of dissociative trance and possession disorders: etiological, diagnostic, therapeutic, and nosological issues. Can J Psychiatry. 2011;56(4):235–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371105600407
-
- Loewenstein RJ. Dissociation debates: everything you know is wrong. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2018;20(3):229–242. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2018.20.3/rloewenstein
-
- Dorahy MJ, Brand BL, Sar V, Krüger C, Stavropoulos P, Martínez‐Taboas A, et al. Dissociative identity disorder: an empirical overview. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2014;48(5):402–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867414527523
-
- Yang J, Millman LSM, David AS, Hunter ECM. The prevalence of depersonalization‐derealization disorder: a systematic review. J Trauma Dissociation. 2023;24(1):8–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2022.2079796
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources