Part 1: Legal

Question 1

Define: Iatrogenic Effects

Answer 1

the effects of being treated (negative effects of being treated); a problem that you have now that you didn’t have prior to treatment.

Question 2

3 Requirements of Commitment

Answer 2

• Mental Illness
• Need for Treatment (part of dangerousness): “Danger to Self”
• Dangerousness: “Danger to Others”

Question 3

2 Requirements of Justification

Answer 3

-Parens Patriae “Parent of the State/Country”—Danger to Self
It is the government’s responsibility to protect its citizens; if you are in danger, it is the responsibility of the government to keep you alive.
-Police Power—Danger to Others

Question 4

Tarasoff Case

Answer 4

Concepts: Tarasoff was before Tarasoff (there was no Tarasoff requirement for the therapist, confidentiality was crucial and absolute). This therapist breeched-putting himself on the line to protect the woman-and told campus security and the woman. The courts sued him and the University.
Led to Tarasoff-Duty to Warn
The APA was unhappy and appealed the case. The court did away with Duty to Warn and decided that therapists have the Duty to Protect. Warnings are not enough.
Not all states have Tarasoff rulings. Some have ruling to warn, protect, or both. Focus on protect.

Question 5

Requirements for Competence

2

Answer 5

1) You have to understand the charges and be aware of what is going on
2) You have the mental capacity to defend your behavior

Question 6

Patient’s Rights

Answer 6

Right to Treatment
-A humane psychological and physical environment
-Qualified staff in numbers sufficient to administer adequate treatment
-Individualized treatment plans
(Wyatt v. Stickney)
Right to Refuse Treatment

Question 7

Competence to be Executed:

Answer 7

you have to be competent to be executed. The death penalty is supposed to be the most severe punishment, but if you are unaware of your sentence you are unable to feel the full weight of your punishment.

Question 8

Guilty with diminished capacity:

Answer 8

Individual has been tried, and found guilty and are given a sentence; however, at sentencing the severity of the punishment is diminished. This form of commitment may be the reason the general public has the perception the “guilty by reason of insanity” is popular.

Question 9

Not guilty by reason of insanity:

Answer 9

NGRI: tried, but found “not guilty” because of the defendant’s mental illness. There is a diagnosis, but if the defendant doesn’t present as “dangerous” he/she doesn’t receive a sentence/punishment
4 states don’t allow the NGRI as a defense (Utah, Idaho, Kansas, and Montana)

Question 10

Guilty but mentally ill

Answer 10

GBMI: individual tried and found guilty and will receive a sentence, and will have to serve time in prison and the state will try to treat mental illness by written request.

Question 11

Insanity Defense Tests:

Irresistible impulse rule

Answer 11

(1834): all insanity tests require a mental illness diagnosis, the impulse was too great & the individual couldn’t help themselves (aka Elbow Rule: if you had a police officer at your elbow, and you still would have engaged in the behavior- you should receive this ruling). EX: a schizophrenic hallucinating that people are trying to kill them, and defends himself by killing someone

Question 12

Insanity Defense Tests: M’Naghten Rule

Answer 12

(1843): before this rule, if your behavior was a result of your mental illness you aren’t held accountable. David M’Naghten wasn’t happy with the British Prime Minister, and planned a break-in and kills the secretary. He gets off without a sentence because the court ruled that he had a mental illness. Queen Victoria was unhappy with this outcome and wanted a tighter stance.] If you have a mental illness either 1) didn’t know what they were doing or 2) didn’t know it was wrong, then you aren’t held accountable.

Question 13

Insanity Defense Tests: Durham test

Answer 13

(1954): if your behavior is a result of a mental illness- you are not responsible (100 years later–back to before M’Naghten Rule). [Monty Durham was in and out of mental health hospitals for breaking and entering. He got off.]

Question 14

Insanity Defense Tests: American Law Institute

Answer 14

(ALI) (1962): [Archy Brawner- was at a party and had a drunken argument, left and came back and shot at the front door. Someone was behind it and he killed them. He got off due to Durham test.] A personal is not responsible for criminal conduct, if at the time of behavior, if 1) it was a result of mental illness, 2) “Lacks substantial capacity” to appreciate the criminality of his act or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. M’Naghten+Durham+Irresistible Impulse

Question 15

Insanity Defense Tests: Insanity Defense Reform Act

Answer 15

(1984): [John Hinkley (assassination attempt on Ragan) used the insanity defense and was successful] tighten the insanity plea

Question 16

5 Points of the INSANITY DEFENSE REFORM ACT

Answer 16

1. Threw out Irresistible Impulse rule
2. Swapped “lacks substantial capacity” for “unable to appreciate”
3. The mental illness used as a defense has to be severe (no ADHD or alcoholism)
4. Shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense (!!!) [instead of “prove me wrong,” it changes to “prove me right”]
5. If you are successful in defending insanity, you must be treated (in a mental hospital) the minimum amount of time you would have served if the defendant had been proven guilty. Minimum penalty served in a hospital
   * STANDARD FOR ALL FEDERAL COURT (someone from the states who don’t allow NGRI could receive the sentencing)*