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

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

article

Alan R. Felthous¹ 

[1] Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, Saint Louis University School of Medicine

关键词: insanity defense;    rationality;    criminal responsibility;    mens rea defense;   

DOI  :  10.29158/JAAPL.210054-21

学科分类：儿科学

来源: American Academy of Psychiatry The Law

【 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.

【 授权许可】

All Rights reserved