Characteristics of the Patients Subjected to the Mental Disability Evaluation and Legal Decisions

Choi, Yun Jung; Cho, Jee Hee; Kwon, Jung Wha

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study was to assess the objective and universal attitudes toward mentally-disabled defendants. The authors examined the criminal characteristics of the mentally-disabled defendants and clarified the differences between psychiatric opinions about the criminal responsibilities of mental patients and the final judicial decisions.
METHODS
The subjects consisted of 75 mentally-disabled defendants. They had been referred to Seoul Eunpung Municipal hospital during the period of Jan. 1990 to Mar. 1997. We examined them through psychiatric interview, clinical psychological tests and other tests. The data obtained were analyzed in several aspects: demographic factors, characteristics of crime, psychiatric opinions and legal opinions.
RESULTS
Regarding the demographic background, most commonly met subjects were males, single, in their twenties and thirties, with educational background of about 11 years, unemployed, and living in urban districts. Approximately one third(37.5%) of all subjects were diagnosed as schizophrenia, 10.8% an mood disorder and 9.3% as personality disorder. The most frequent criminal act was assault and battery(28.0) and the mental states at the time of the criminal act could be inferred as delusion/hallucination(52.0%) and paroxysmal emotional uncontrollable state(33.3%),etc. About forty perecnt(39.4%) of victims were strangers, 25.3% were public servants 21.3% were family members. According to the psychiatric report out of 75 defenddants, defendants were classified as followes:44 defendants were evaluated to be totally free of criminal responsibility, 22 defendants to be partially responsible, and 5 defendants to be fully responsible. However, the psychiatric evaluation was found to be in contrast with the final judicial decisions by the court:16 defendants were totally free of criminal responsibility, 44 of restricted criminal responsibility and 15 fully responsible. In case of no responsibility, the agreement rate between the judge's opinions and the psychiatric ones was 36.3%, for partial responsibility it was 73.0%, and for full responsibility it was 100%. DISCUSSION: The judges do not completely agree to psychiatric opinions. Therefore, the authors suggest that more facilitated communication between psychiatrists and judges should be necessary for the benefiit of mentally-disabled defendants.