Premium
Assessing and restoring competency to be executed: Should psychiatrists participate?
Author(s) -
Mossman Douglas
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
behavioral sciences and the law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.649
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1099-0798
pISSN - 0735-3936
DOI - 10.1002/bsl.2370050404
Subject(s) - wainwright , autonomy , rationality , psychology , psychiatry , capital (architecture) , state (computer science) , supreme court , law , criminology , political science , computer science , archaeology , algorithm , history
Ford v. Wainwright (1986) is one among several recent U. S. Supreme Court decisions granting psychiatrists a distinct but awkward role in the capital punishment process. Ford affirms the right of the condemned to be spared execution while mentally incompetent, and validates state laws requiring psychiatric evaluation and treatment of capital inmates who plead that they have become insane while awaiting execution. The ruling raises troublesome questions for psychiatry, including whether it is ethical for psychiatrists to assess or treat prisoners, thereby enabling their execution. This article argues that evaluation and treatment of capital inmates is in accordance with medical practice standards that emphasize respect for patients' autonomy and rationality.