Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:29:01.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legal frameworks and key concepts regulating diversion and treatment of mentally disordered offenders in european union member states

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2007

Harald Dressing ,
Hans Joachim Salize  and
Harvey Gordon
Harald Dressing*
Affiliation:
Central institute of Mental Health, University of Heidelberg, 68159Mannheim, Germany
Hans Joachim Salize
Affiliation:
Central institute of Mental Health, University of Heidelberg, 68159Mannheim, Germany
Harvey Gordon
Affiliation:
The Oxford Clinic Medium Secure Unit, Oxford, UK
*
∗Corresponding author. Zentralinstitut für seelische Gesundheit J5, 68159 Mannheim, Germany. Tel.: +49 0621 1703 2941; fax: +49 0621 1703 2005. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Dressing).
Get access

Abstract

Background

There is only limited research on the various legal regulations governing assessment, placement and treatment of mentally ill offenders in European Union member states (EU-member states).

Aims

To provide a structured description and cross-boundary comparison of legal frameworks regulating diversion and treatment of mentally disordered offenders in EU-member states before the extension in May 2004. A special focus is on the concept of criminal responsibility.

Method

information on legislation and practice concerning the assessment, placement and treatment of mentally ill offenders was gathered by means of a detailed, structured questionnaire which was filled in by national experts.

Results

The legal regulations relevant for forensic psychiatry in EU-member states are outlined. Definitions of mental disorders given within these acts are introduced and compared with ICD-10 diagnoses. Finally the application of the concept of criminal responsibility by the law and in routine practice is presented.

Conclusion

Legal frameworks for the processing and placement of mentally disordered offenders varied markedly across EU-member states. Since May 2004 the European Union has expanded to 25 member states and in January 2007 it will reach 27. With increasing mobility across Europe, the need for increasing trans-national co-operation is becoming apparent in which great variation in legal tradition pertains.

Keywords

Forensic psychiatryCriminal responsibilityLegal frameworks
Type
Original article
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 22 , Issue 7 , October 2007 , pp. 427 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alper, J.S.Genes, free will and criminal responsibility. Soc Sci Med 1998;46:1599–1661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
andoh, B.The McNaughton rules: the story so far. Med Leg J 1993;61:93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barras, B., Bernheim, J.The history of law and psychiatry in Europe. in: Bluglass, R., Bowden, P. editors. Principles and practice of forensic psychiatry. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1990. p. 103–109.Google Scholar
Blaauw, E., Hoeve, M., Van Marle, H., Sheridan, L.Mentally disordered offenders. international perspectives on assessment and treatment. The Hague: Elsevier; 2002.Google Scholar
Ciccone, J.R., Ferracuti, S.Comparative forensic psychiatry I., Commentary on the Italian system. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law 1995;23:449–452.Google ScholarPubMed
Coid, J., Maden, T.Should psychiatrists protect the public?. BMJ 2003;326:406–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastman, N.Mental health law reform in England and Wales. BMJ 2006;332:737–738.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harding, T.Forensic psychiatry in Europe. in: Bluglass, R., Bowden, P. editors. Principles and practice of forensic psychiatry. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1990. p. 1235–1239.Google Scholar
Henderson, S.The neglect of volition. Br J Psychiatry 2005;186:273–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgins, S.The major mental disorders and crime: stop debating and start treating and preventing. int J Law Psychiatry 2001;24:427–446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nedopil, N., Otterman, B.Treatment of mentally ill offenders in Germany: with special reference to the newest forensic hospital – Straubing in Bavaria. int J Law Psychiatry 1993;16:247–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niveau, G.Preventing human rights abuses in psychiatric establishments: the work of the CPT. Eur Psychiatry 2004;19:146–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogloff, J.R.P., Roesch, R., Eaves, D.international perspective on forensic mental health systems. int J Law Ment Health 2000;23(5-6):429–431.Google ScholarPubMed
Rasch, W.Criminal responsibility in Europe. in: Bluglass, R., Bowden, P. editors. Principles and practice of forensic psychiatry. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1990. p. 299–305.Google Scholar
Roesch, R.Creating change in the legal system: contribution from community psychology. Law Hum Behav 1995;19:325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenman, S., Psychiatrists and compulsion: a map of ethics. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 32:785–93.Google Scholar
Roth, G.Fuhlen – Denken – Handeln. Frankhurt: Suhrkamp; 2001.Google Scholar
in: Salize, H.J., Dressing, H. editors. Placement and treatment of mentally disordered offenders – legislation and practice in the European Union. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers; 2005. p. 47–53.Google Scholar
Salize, H.J., Lepping, P., Dressing, H.Editorial: How harmonized are we? Forensic mental health legislation and service provision in the European Union. Crim Behav Ment Health 2005;15(3):143–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schanda, H., Ortwein-Swoboda, G., Knecht, G., Gruber, K.The situation of forensic psychiatry in Austria. Setback or progress?. int J Law Psychiatry 2000;23(5-6):481–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singer, W.Ein Neues Menschenbild. Frankhurt: Suhrkamp; 2003.Google Scholar
Smith, R.Criminal insanity: from a historic point of view. Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law 1982;11:27–34.Google Scholar
Sturup, G.K.Treating the ‘untreatable’. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press; 1968.Google Scholar
Van Marle, H.Forensic psychiatric services in the Netherlands. int J Law Psychiatry 2000;23(5-6):515–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WHO resource book on mental health, human rights and legislation. WHO; 2005.Google Scholar
Zeegers, M.Diminished responsibility: a logical, workable and essential concept. int J Law Psychiatry 1981;4:433–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.