Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T11:30:49.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Criminal responsibility and mental illness in Ireland 1850-1995: fitness to plead

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

Pat Gibbons
Affiliation:
La Vice-Rectoria de Investigacun, La Universidad Tecnolugica, Calle Arce, San Salvador, El Salvador
Niamh Mulryan
Affiliation:
Central Mental Hospital
Angela McAleer
Affiliation:
Central Mental Hospital
Art O'Connor
Affiliation:
Central Mental Hospital, Dundrum, Dublin 14, Ireland

Abstract

Objectives: To describe forensic and clinical characteristics of unfit to plead defendants in Ireland between 1850 and 1995 as well as outcome in terms of length of stay in custody and ultimate disposal of cases. These data are compared with studies from the US and the UK. The White Paper on Mental Health (1995) highlights the need for significant change in the management of mentally ill defendants who come before the courts. The current criteria for the assessment of fitness to plead date from 1836. There has been little previous research on the use of fitness to plead procedures in Ireland which might guide future law reform.

Method: This is a retrospective study of demographic, forensic and clinical data on an almost complete sample of 488 unfit to plead patients admitted to the Central Mental Hospital between 1850 and 1995. A standardised profile was completed on each subject with data drawn from hospital records and entered onto a database for analysis.

Results: The use of the fitness to plead procedures peaked in the period 1910-20, and has fallen into substantial decline since then. Defendants were usually male, with a mean age of 37 years who had been charged with a violent crime. Three quarters of defendants were psychotic on admission. The mean length of detention was 14.3 years and only 4% were ultimately returned for trial.

Conclusions: The decline in the number of fitness to plead findings is probably related to the reluctance of defendants to use the procedure due to the resulting prolonged period of detention. The introduction of a formal judicial review procedure to reassess the appropriateness of detention is urgently required to protect the civil liberties of those found to be unfit to plead.

Type
Original Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

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

1.Macauley, F. Insaniry, psychiatry and criminal responsibility. Dublin: Round Hall Press, 1993.Google Scholar
2.Dolan, MC, Campbell, AA. The Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act, 1991. A Case Report and Selected Review of Legal Reforms. Med Sci Law 1991; 34(2): 155–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. White Paper on Mental Health 1995. Molesworth St, Dublin 1: Governmenr Publications Office, 1995.Google Scholar
4.Grubin, DH. Unfit to plead in England and Wales 1976-88: a survey. Br J Psychiatry 1992; 158: 540–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Hutchinson, L, O'Connor, A. Unfit to plead in Ireland. Ir J Psych Med 1995; 12(3): 112–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Central Statistics Office 1992. The National Census of Population 1991 (volume 1). Dublin: Government Publications Office, 1991.Google Scholar
7.Wilbanks, W. Homicide in Ireland. Int J Compar Applied Crim Justice 1996; 20: 5975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Finane, M. Insanity and the insane in post-famine Ireland. London: Croom Helm, 1981.Google Scholar
9.Smith, C, O'Neill, H, Tobin, J, Walshe, D. Mental disorders in an Irish prison sample. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 1996; 6: 177–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Mohan, D, Scully, P, Collins, C, Smith, C. Psychiatric disorder in an Irish female prison. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 1997; 7: 229–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Nicholson, RA, Kugler, KE. Competent and incompetent criminal defendants: a quantitative review of comparative research. Psychol Bull 1991; 109(3): 355–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Gibbons, P, Mulryan, N, O'Connor, A. Guilty but insane: the insanity defence in Ireland 1850-1995. Br J Psychiat 1997; 170: 467–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Steadman, HJ. Beating a rap? Defendants found incompetent to stand trial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.Google Scholar
14.Chiswick, D. Insaniry in bar of trial in Scortand: a srate hospital study. Br J Psychiat 1978; 132: 598601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Macdonald, DA, Nussbaum, DS, Bagby, RM. Reliability, validity and utility of the Fitness Interview Test. Can J Psychiatry 1991; 36(7): 480–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Whtttemore, KE, Ogloff, JR. Fitness and competency issues in Canadian criminal courts: Elucidating the standards for mental health professionals. Can J Psychiat 1994; 39(4): 198209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Larkin, EP, Collins, PJ. Fitness to plead and psychiatric reports. Med Sci Law 1989; 29: 2632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.McGarry, AL, Lipsitt, PD, Leios, D. Competency to stand trial and mental illness. Rockville MD: National Institute of Mental Health, Centre for Studies of Crime and Delinquency, 1973.Google Scholar
19.Roesch, R, Webster, CD, Eaves, D. The Fitness Interview Test: a method for examining fitness to stand trial. Toronro ON: Research Report of the Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto, 1984.Google Scholar
20.Chiswick, D. Fitness to Plead. In: Bluglass, R, Bowden, P eds. Principles and Practice of Forensic Psychiatry. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1990: 171–7.Google Scholar