I didn't see a topic on this so I decided to thusly do so. I'll start off with my opinion.

Yes, I think it's right for a criminal having been deemed not guilty by reason of insanity to not go to jail.

Andrea Yates. In 2001, she drowned all five of her children, the oldest being seven and the youngest being a nine month old baby. Her defense asserted that she was suffering from schizophrenia and post-partum psychosis. She claimed to be hearing voices which told her that she had to kill her kids or they would suffer eternal damnation in hell. As extreme as her crime was, I think she shouldn't have gone to jail. Clearly, this woman wasn't in her right mind, and it's an understatement to say that it's difficult to reason logically when you're suffering auditory halluciations. Yes, she murdered all five of her children. But how can she be expected to differentiate what is right and wrong when she isn't even sane?

My aunt is a paranoid schizophrenic and has been my entire life. She is so unable to reason coherently that she often steals from her own family. Everyone had to install locks on their bedroom doors because she was so prone to stealing their things. When I was visiting her once (I was about eight or so), she stole my beanie baby. The day she lost her mind-- I don't know how else to put it because that's just how it went, she just suddenly lost her mind-- she burned all of her legal documents including her birth certificate and passport. She was absolutely sure that her entire family was plotting against her, and tried to kill my cousin. But you know what? She's insane. How can society expect the insane to be rational and then punish them with prison or even the death penalty when they fail to do so?

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the insanity defense. Agree/disagree/whatever. I'm interested in knowing everyone's thoughts.

*sigh* I accidentally clicked should go to prison instead of shouldn't. So that one vote is wrong.

I agree Aeris Strife, that's why they're mitigating circumstances. The only reason there seems to be any conjecture about this is from the overly dramatic representations of this plea in court television programs.

I agree that they should not go to prison. Instead they should be sent to a center or institute for the mentally disabled, where they can be given proper care and treatment.

As such, I think it's the best option for anyone with a mental disability to be sent to such institutions. 'Normal' families usually don't quite know the right way to look after such disabled people, and if proper care isn't taken, then results like that murder case you mentioned above could happen.

However, I suppose some people think that murder is murder, be it rational or not. :ermm: I disagree with such views based on the psychological state of the murderer, but unfortunately not everyone understands their situations. -_-

If the murderer was mentally disabled - but had a slight sense of rational in them to differentiate right and wrong - do you still think he/she should be sent to jail? :unsure:

Well, there was no choice that said "Go to mental hospital" so I clicked go to prison.
Come off it. They are not mentally balanced therefore, they must be protected from themselves, and other people must be protected from them.

For all practical purposes, an insane asylum and prison are effectively one and the same. It takes the criminal out of society's path.

Those who are truly insane should certainly be in an asylum, however, and not with other criminals. But they should not be released any more then other criminals, either.

Eh ... don't worry Sadhana =/

Most people with mental health problems aren't often likely to being going out and trying to kill someone so I wouldn't worry about your aunt *hugs*

In my experience I've found most schizophrenics are more likely to harm themselves if anything not other people and as long as they are getting help they are less likely to do the former too.

I have quite a history of mental illness in my family - my dad was schizophrenic and though I don't know him I've heard the stories, my grandpa suffered from severe clinical depression as I have and my uncle has schizo affective disorder. Both my nana and my mother have suffered from depression as well.

I'm so glad I live in this era else I might have been put in an asylum (my grandpa was given the electric shock treatment >_>)

People that kill though ... I don't think it's as clear as mentally fit or not ... maybe it's something different that's broken inside of them.

I believe all people should be punished for what they have done regardless of there state of mind because as much as we think we do, we no nothing about the mind and what it's capable of.

It's the same reason on a actual medical diagram {not the ones we see at the doctor or in school books but the one doctors use they have other charts for the brain but there just to show all the lobes and other mechanical workings of it not the thought process} of the human body the head is not there cause it's the last frontier of medical science we don't know enough about it.

So in all respect to the people who may be suffering from a mental disease and commits a crime like miss Yates, should still be locked away not roaming around town possible maybe doing it again. i don't really care where there locked up ether it's all the same. people in psychology wards and prisons don't really get much help. and are often abused by the staff same as in regular prison. and in wards they get to sit in there cell drugged out of there mind so the'll stay calm so basicly my tax dollars get to support a abused and now doped up woman who killed her kids, not my idea of humane or money well spent.

I often wonder about that case and if she was telling the truth or not but we won't ever know for quite some time, just because a psychologist says someone has a certain disease dosent mean it's true people have faked being ill to get drugs.

so being on the safe side of things i wouldent want to see someone like her walking around my local wal-mart after what she did.

Then again, Wal-Mart's done immeasurably more evil towards society as compared to Miss Yates. So, personally, I'd be much more uncomfortable at a local Wal-Mart than around her. ;) :P

To be clear, a mental health facility, despite its depiction in such cultural works as One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, is not the same as prison. They are encouraged to interact with groups around the ward, visitations are far more lenient and intimate, and they receive treatment for their illness. They may even one day be released if they're deemed mentally capable. In the past, asylums may've been the same as prison, but they've gotten much better.

But here's another thought to ponder: in the U.S. in 2003, estimates were that 16% of people in prison were mentally ill which is about 300,000 prisoners. And they do not receive the same treatment in prison that they do in a mental health facility. In prison, if they act out because of their illness, guards may beat them into submission and then hold the event against the prisoner in the form of a longer prison sentence. Their illness often degenerates due to lack of treatment, and then the abusive cycle worsens.

For the few people who actually use the insanity plea (there are very few), if they truly are suffering from a mental incapability, I think it's better for them to receive treatment than go to prison. It's not their fault that their mind degenerated the way it did, and I therefore don't hold them accountable for their crimes the same way I do regular criminals.

Mental institutions, much like prisons, vary considerably by location and level of funding. Some are relatively benign and helpful, others are nearly as bad as aerislives mentions. I know that here in Florida, the institutions are much better than, say, California, where they have very bad reputations. The same can be said for prisons though, they vary based on location and funding as well.

The key concern for handling any criminal, regardless of their state of mental health, is to remove them from a position where they could threaten or harm others. In this way, both an institution and a prison function equally well.

I certainly believe that many times, the insanity plea is abused in an a perceived attempt to get a lighter sentence. However this isn't always the case, and there are plenty of genuine cases as well. Mental science is still in it's infancy, and we do not truly understand the human brain yet, so often times it's very difficult to ascertain whether or not the individual truly is a mentally ill, or just evil. Sometimes they can be one and the same. Certainly one wouldn't claim that a serial killer was in a right state of mind. Yet do we hold that person responsible for their crimes, or do we say that they were mentally ill? It's a difficult question, and until mental science gets a better grip on what what defines a mental illness we won't really have an answer to this question, just an educated guess.

So was Miss Yates insane? Was her diagnoses correct? Quite likely, but we don't really know. Perhaps she was just evil and didn't want her kids anymore. But perhaps being that evil is a disease in itself. Either way the most important thing is not to heal her of her mental illness, if she has one. The most important thing is to keep her locked up somewhere so that she cannot harm anyone else. And if we cannot reliably ascertain if she was mentally ill or not, can we ever assume she has been cured? She should not be released, even if "cured." The risk to society is too great, and the benefits too marginal for that be a viable option. Still I would agree that an institution is probably a better place for her, so long as she remains locked up and away from society.

Incidentally, I must respectfully disagree with the Wal-mart remark. Certainly that company, as all large multi-national corporations, has it's serious flaws... but until they start drowning children, I cannot equate them with Miss Yates.

I understand the point you make. However, schizophrenia and post-partum psychosis (the incapacitations that Andrea Yates suffered from) are very different from just being in a wrong state of mind. Often times, this means neuroplasticity in the form of enlarged ventricles. These are fluid filled sacks, and their enlargement creates pressure on the brain, which also explains why many patients suffering from schizophrenia have a reduction in brain volume. For her, reality was the voices she heard, the hallucinations she suffered, and the intense paranoia she was feeling. How can you make level-headed decisions when your mind is falling apart?

As for serial killers, I think there are specific differences between their state of mind and that of someone suffering from psychosis. They enjoy the suffering of the other person, they are aware of what they are doing as they make calculating decisions to avoid law detection, and when they do kill, it is with violent intentions unlike those are mentally ill and doing it without the usual motives.

As I said, it was a personal sentiment, and furthermore it was more joking than serious. However, I equate them because while Andrea Yates killed five children, Wal-Mart's exploitation means people who's jobs are being outsourced and therefore can't feed their families and employees who can't afford the awful health care and are therefore forced to be without it. Studies conducted by the company showed that 80% of crimes that occur at Wal-Mart take place in the parking lots (this includes dozens of cases of rapes, murders, and abductions). But they still refuse to fund any parking lot security cameras because they instead spend the money on security cameras to watch employees to make sure that they aren't trying to form a union. The company may not have personally drowned five children, but its apathy towards everything but money has been detrimental to millions of lives. That's why I can personally equate them.

not true really wal-mart is the highest employing public corporation in the world, so much so that I work for them the only other employer bigger than us is the government.

And the health care isn't awful i got my insurance for $20 a month thats dental and the largest package of health offerings.

there also one of the fairest paying employers i started out at $9.35 an hour stocking overnight trust me thats good pay in my state, now i make over 25,000 a year as a manager this is very good considering i never passed high school speaking of which they have a GED program that pays for all your books, the test it's self ,and classes. also tons of discounts at alot of places, cars rentals etc.

outsourcing i havent seen it what would we outsource cart pushers lol nope there just as important to the company as i am. sure most of the stuff we sale is made by outsourced companies so go complain to them. nearly every company in the world is outsourcing now pc companies, auto makers, even the disk our beloved FF7 game came on was outsourced. it's very sad for people to lose there jobs but this world is sad and theres not a thing thats going to change. thats life welcome to it.

and the cameras wow you know alot of people have been killed robbed and raped in other parking lots too and we have cameras all over the outside of our building. cameras outside is optional to if you want cameras there ask your city to do it there the ones who own the land that wal-marts are built upon, you heard me right wal-mart does not own the land we rent it. rich citys have kept wal-marts out by saying it's an eyesore or it attracts crime oh and by crime they mean poor people people who need jobs.

as for the inside cameras there for theft by workers and customers not to prevent a union from starting trust me we could join it any day if we wanted to because nobody is watching the cameras there recording to a hard drive. and if you want to start a union you just call your local union office and get the majority of the workers of the employer to come down to the office the cards don't have to be signed at work. thats how BF Goodrich joined it here at our local plant.

but for over 1.5 million employed by this company we say no to a union cause they treat us better than a union will.

bottom line, people want a good place to work or shop at and cheap prices too, wal-mart inc, has provided this when i got laid off from office max it took me forever to find another job due to i had no ged everybody wants it now even the army until i decided i would work here and it's great i hate some of the people here but other than that i love it.

sorry to go off topic but i have to defend the company that has provided me the means of living and keeps food on my table.

For every happy Wal-Mart employee, there also seems to be another disgruntled one. I personally know a few people who worked at Wal-Mart and recounted it as the worst employment experience they ever had. The stories vary, but I tend to trust the ones that have more empirical evidence than personal opinion. I don't mean to devalue your view, but that's just how I do it.

But yes, let's not go off topic anymore. :D

If they are truly insane, then I do not think they should go to prision. However, they should not be put back on the street. I think they should be committed to an mental hospital if they are truly dangerous. Unfortunatnly, I do not think the hospitals are allowed to keep them there for life. It's a real shame because many of these people end up homeless and out on the street.