The Differing Views on Insanity of Two Nineteenth Century Forensic Psychiatrists
Author(s) -
Allen D. Spiegel,
Florence Kavaler
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of community health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1573-3610
pISSN - 0094-5145
DOI - 10.1007/s10900-006-9017-5
Subject(s) - insanity , viewpoints , plea , insanity defense , officer , law , forensic psychiatry , spanish civil war , criminology , criminal trial , homicide , forensic science , gray (unit) , psychiatry , psychology , political science , psychoanalysis , history , medicine , suicide prevention , poison control , art , medical emergency , archaeology , radiology , visual arts
Dr. Charles H. Nichols and Dr. John P. Gray were the two foremost forensic psychiatrists in the latter half of the nineteenth century in the U.S. However, their rationales differed dramatically. They were involved in four notable murder trials where insanity issues arose: one was a trial for the murderer of a Union officer during the Civil War; in another, a conspirator was tried for the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln; in the third, a temporary insanity plea was supported by a medical expert for the first time in a U.S. courtroom; and the fourth was the trial of the assassin of President James A. Garfield. Pointedly, their differing viewpoints still remain controversial today.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom