Premium
Drugs and Alcohol: the psychiatrist as expert witness in court
Author(s) -
D'ORBÁN P. T.
Publication year - 1986
Publication title -
british journal of addiction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.424
H-Index - 193
eISSN - 1360-0443
pISSN - 0952-0481
DOI - 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1986.tb00381.x
Subject(s) - insanity defense , expert witness , witness , insanity , mental state , diminished responsibility , psychiatry , state (computer science) , psychology , criminal responsibility , alcohol intoxication , law , classification of mental disorders , criminal law , criminology , medicine , poison control , political science , medical emergency , injury prevention , mental health , computer science , prevalence of mental disorders , algorithm
Summary Expert psychiatric testimony is allowed only when some form of abnormal mental state is under consideration. Intoxication with drugs or alcohol is not in itself regarded as mental abnormality and is no defence to a criminal charge, unless there is evidence that they have produced a mental disorder. Intoxication may also be a defence to crimes of ‘specific intent’ if the accused because of his intoxication did not have the requisite intent. This paper reviews the extent to which drug or alcohol related mental disorders can qualify under the present legal formulae governing the special defences of insanity, diminished responsibility and provocation, and discusses the illogical state of the law on intoxication affecting intent. Legal reforms recommended by the Butler Committee would resolve some of the present conflicts between psychiatry and the law and would enable psychiatrists to confine their testimony to the mental state of the accused rather than forcing them to conform to legal formulae which use concepts that are not within the framework of medicine.