FBS 153 Final
Why is it important for defendants to be competent?
. Specifically, defendants are competent to stand trial if they have "sufficient present ability to consult with their lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding...and a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings" (Dusky v. United States, 1960, p. 402). To protect the rights of the individual and to preserve the dignity of the court process, the law states that a person who is incompetent must not be tried.
Know various statistics about rape reported in lecture, such as the following:- The estimated percentage of males and females who will be raped in their lifetime- The percentage of male and female victims who report being raped - How frequently rape (and other forms of sexual violence) occur- Who is most at risk of being a victim of sexual violence?- Who is most likely to perpetrate acts of sexual violence? What are the characteristics and criminal history of offenders?- Etc.
As noted previously, for the period 1995 to 2013, females ages 18 to 24 experienced the highest rate of rape and sexual assault victimizations compared to females in all other age groups (Sinozich & Langton, 2014). However, a significant portion of both females and males are sexually assaulted before the age of 18 (Finkelhor, Shattuck, Turner, & Hamby, 2014). Basile and Smith (2011) report that 71 percent of female victims were first raped before the age of 18 years. Over half of the victims were raped or sexually assaulted by acquaintance peers (Finkelhor et al., 2014). Tjaden and Thoennes (2000) discovered that of the 17.6 percent of all women surveyed, who indicated they had been the victim of a completed or attempted rape at some time in their life, 21.6 percent said they were younger than age 12 when they were first raped. Another 32 percent said they were between the ages of 12 and 17 when first raped. These data are consistent with the ECA study described earlier in the chapter. As noted in Chapter 9, however, sexual assault of older individuals is underreported and understudied.
According to research presented, can we treat and rehabilitate adult psychopaths? Children and adolescents with psychopathic features?
As we noted in the previous section, the treatment and rehabilitation of adult criminal psychopaths has been cloaked with pessimism and discouragement, less so in more recent years. Unfortunately, little is known about the effectiveness of prevention and treatment methods for child and adolescent psychopathy (Farrington, 2005a, p. 494) or, as many researchers and clinicians prefer to say, children and adolescents with psychopathic tendencies or characteristics. (See again Box 7-2 for an exception.) Logically, it makes sense to hypothesize that children and adolescents with psychopathic features would respond more positively than psychopathic adults to prevention and treatment strategies because of their malleability. Consequently, researchers have begun to evaluate the effectiveness of (a) treatment programs designed specifically for juveniles with psychopathic characteristics, and (b) programs for youthful offenders that include those with psychopathic characteristics. Studies have underscored the observations that children and adolescents with psychopathic features show distinct sets of emotional and cognitive deficits that lead to their violent and antisocial behavior. According to Salekin and Frick (2005), knowledge about these areas may be important for designing more individualized interventions for youths with psychopathic traits. For example, laboratory studies have revealed that children with conduct problems and high levels of callous-unemotional (CU) traits exhibit tendencies to respond better to reward-driven interventions and respond poorly to punishment-driven or fear-induced forms of intervention (Hawes & Dadds, 2005). These findings imply that children displaying high-reward drive and low fearful inhibitions should, compared with conduct-problem children without CU traits, respond well to parents who use reward-based strategies for changing behavior (e.g., praise, rewards, reinforcement tokens), but remain insensitive to other parental disciplinary practices (e.g., time-outs, forms of verbal or behavioral punishments, such as scolding or confiscating a favorite game). "The assessment of CU traits in addition to other established risk factors," Hawes and Dadds (2005) conclude, "may allow such children to be targeted with more individualized intervention"
Discuss whether youth can be "diagnosed" with psychopathy? How would this be done?
Furthermore, specific instruments designed to measure psychopathy in the young, such as a youth version of the PCL-R (PCL:YV) and the Child Psychopathy Scale (CPS; Lynam, 1997), have provided support for measuring the construct. These will be discussed again shortly. There is also substantial evidence that male criminal psychopaths begin their offending patterns at a very early age (Frick, 2009; Rutter, 2005). Even so, attempts to apply the label "psychopathy" to juvenile populations "raise several conceptual, methodological, and practical concerns related to clinical/forensic practice and juvenile/criminal justice policy" (Edens, Skeem, Cruise, & Cauffman, 2001, p. 54). Some debate has focused on whether psychopathy can or should be applied to juveniles at all. Can features of adult psychopathy be found in children and adolescents in the first place? Others are concerned that—even if psychopathy can be identified in adolescents—the label may have too many negative connotations. More specifically, the label implies that the prognosis for treatment is poor, a high rate of offending and recidivism can be expected, and the intrinsic and biological basis of the disorder means little can be done outside of biological interventions.
What traits are characteristic of psychopathy?
Glibness/superficial charmSuperficial charm and good intelligenceGrandiose sense of self-worthPathological egocentricityPathological lyingUntruthfulness and insincerityCunning/manipulativeManipulativeLack of remorse or guiltLack of remorse or guiltShallow affectGeneral poverty of affective reactionsCallous, lack of empathyUnresponsiveness in interpersonal relationshipsFailure to accept responsibility for actionsUnreliabilityPromiscuous sexual behaviorImpersonal sex lifeLack of realistic, long-term goalsFailure to follow any life planPoor behavioral controlsImpulsiveHigh need for stimulation/prone to boredomInadequately motivated antisocial behaviorIrresponsibilityPoor judgment Absence of delusions Absence of anxiety Bizarre behavior after drinking alcohol
How were past and current insanity standards developed? What cases influenced the development of insanity standards? How has the insanity defense evolved over time?
If found incompetent to stand trial—a decision that must be made by the presiding judge—the defendant is typically sent to a mental institution until rendered competent, as was Loughner. For those defendants who are restored to competency, some research suggests that the average time needed for restoration is about three months (Hoge et al., 1996). In a survey of mental health program directors across the United States, Miller (2003) found that outpatient treatment to restore competency was rare. Outpatient evaluations of competency were on the increase, however. Most recently, though, some states are providing for more competency restoration in the community, particularly for juveniles who have been found incompetent to participate in court proceedings. In such states, inpatient treatment is considered only as a last resort. Until the 1970s, the typical procedure for evaluating competency required that defendants be confined within a maximum security institution for a lengthy psychiatric-psychological evaluation (usually 60 to 90 days). Following evaluation, the defendant was granted a hearing on the matter of competency. If the court found the defendant unable to understand the charges or the judicial proceedings, or to help counsel in his or her defense, then the defendant would automatically be committed to a secure hospital for an indefinite period of time—until competent. Theoretically, this indefinite time period could extend—and sometimes did—into a lifetime of involuntary commitment.
Compare and contrast rape, statutory rape, rape by fraud, marital rape, and date rape. Summarize the research and statistics presented on the estimated incidence of each type. Which type(s) of rape is(are) most common?
In recent years, the term "sexual assault" has often been preferred to the term "rape" in both research and law. Sexual assault is more inclusive, encompassing a variety of behaviors that may or may not include penetration. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, about half of the 50 states did not use the word "rape" in their penal code involving sexual assault or sex offenses (Langan, Schmitt, & Durose, 2003), and many contemporary researchers prefer to refer to sexual assault. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the FBI continues to collect statistics on rape and considers it a major offense. As of December 2013, though, its definition has changed. Rape is now defined as the "Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim" (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014b, p. 1). A significant change regards the sex of the victim, an acknowledgement that both females and males can be raped. In addition, it is clear from the new definition that the penetration of children as well as adults qualifies as rape. In summary, then, the old definition (which the UCR refers to as the legacy definition) described rape as carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. The revised definition expands rape to include both male and female victims and offenders, and reflects the various forms of sexual penetration, including nonconsenting acts of sodomy and sexual assaults with objects.
What is competency to stand trial (CST)? What two elements are used to determine competency? When is competency determined? How is competency determined? That is, how do we evaluate whether someone is competent or not?
It also encompasses two distinct concepts: (1) the competence to proceed (which implies understanding the purpose of the proceedings and being able to help one's attorney) and (2) decisional competence (which implies the ability to comprehend the significance of various decisions to be made) (Mumley et al., 2003). If a criminal defendant is found incompetent to stand trial, the court has essentially determined that he or she cannot understand the process that is occurring or effectively participate in it.
Know the standard(s) for competency in the United States. » Are there ways to restore competency? If so, what are they? What happens if a defendant cannot be restored to competency?
It is important to emphasize the distinction between incompetence to stand trial (IST) and insanity, the legal concept to be discussed below. Although they may be related, the two concepts are distinct and should be assessed by clinicians separately—although this is not always done. In fact, research suggests that at least one-third of competency and sanity evaluations in the United States are done simultaneously with each other—that is, both competency and sanity are evaluated at the same time (Chauhan et al., 2015). In high-profile cases, competency and sanity are more likely to be kept distinct; for example, in ordering the competency evaluation of Jared Loughner, the judge in the case made it clear that the evaluation was to be limited to the issue of competency, not sanity. Criminal responsibility, which is at the core of the insanity defense, and competency to stand trial refer to a defendant's mental state/capacity at two different points in time. If a defendant pleads NGRI, the law asks, "What was the defendant's state of mind at the time the offense was committed?" In competency considerations, the question becomes, "What is the defendant's state of mind at the present time, or at the time of the pretrial proceedings or trial?" An individual who was seriously mentally disordered at the time of an offense and whose criminal responsibility is questionable may have enough mental stability by the time of the trial to be competent to stand trial. On the other hand, a person may be of sound mind during the unlawful act, but may later become disordered or disoriented and be determined incompetent to stand trial.
Identify the ethical dilemmas that juvenile psychopathy presents.
On the whole, though, there is considerable concern about misuse of labels suggesting psychopathy by juvenile justice professionals, including judges, youth detention workers, and treatment providers. Because of the widespread assertion that psychopaths are highly resistant to treatment, an adolescent "psychopath" accused of a crime—or even a youth demonstrating psychopathic characteristics—is more likely to be transferred to the adult court system rather than kept in the juvenile system. In the latter, treatment is more likely to be available once the youth has been adjudicated delinquent. Until very recently, a 16- or 17-year-old juvenile who was labeled a psychopath, was more likely than one without such a label to be sentenced to death in some states (Edens, Guy, & Fernandez, 2003). However, in 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed their crimes at these ages could not be sentenced to death (Roper v. Simmons). The court had previously set 16 as the minimum age at which juveniles were eligible for the death penalty (Thompson v. Oklahoma, 1989). Nevertheless, juveniles who are tried in criminal courts continue to be subjected to punitive criminal sanctions, including life sentences, although the Court also has now banned life sentences without the possibility of parole and mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders (Graham v. Florida, 2010; Miller v. Alabama, 2012). Surprisingly, one respectable study found no negative effects associated with the psychopathy label in a juvenile court (Murrie, Boccaccini, McCoy, & Cornell, 2007), but this seems to be the exception. By contrast, Viljoen et al. (2010) found that juveniles whose cases indicated psychopathy received harsher treatment by juvenile courts, including being transferred to adult courts. Viljoen et al. remarked, "psychopathy evidence was commonly used to infer that a youth would be very difficult or impossible to treat" (p. 271). Even when juveniles are kept in the juvenile system and placed in treatment centers, the label "psychopath" may become a self-fulfilling prophecy with treatment providers who may be unlikely to expend considerable effort on a seemingly hopeless case. Supporters of the construct of juvenile psychopathy argue that treatment providers should have that information at their disposal, both to make management decisions regarding custody and programming and to fashion the type of treatment that could be effective. Others contend that it is important to identify psychopathy as early as possible to avoid the negative consequences to society and to help juveniles with psychopathic characteristics. Fortunately, researchers are beginning to identify promising treatment
Know and be able to compare and contrast Hare's classification of the three types of psychopaths.
Only the primary psychopath is a "true" psychopath. The primary or "true" psychopath—the main subject of this chapter—has certain identifiable psychological, emotional, cognitive, and biological differences that distinguish him or her from the general and criminal populations. We discuss these differences in some detail throughout the chapter. The other two categories meld a heterogeneous group of antisocial individuals who comprise a large segment of the criminal population. Secondary psychopaths commit antisocial or violent acts because of severe emotional problems or inner conflicts. They are sometimes called acting-out neurotics, neurotic delinquents, symptomatic psychopaths, or simply emotionally disturbed offenders. Recent research indicates that the secondary psychopath demonstrates more emotional instability and impulsivity than the primary psychopath, and secondary psychopaths also appear to be more aggressive and violent (Kimonis, Skeem, Cauffman, & Dmitrieva, 2011). The researchers also discovered that the secondary psychopath, compared to the primary psychopath, is more rooted in parental abuse and rejection. The third group, dyssocial psychopaths, display aggressive, antisocial behavior they have learned from their subculture, like their gangs, terrorist groups, or families. In both cases, the label "psychopath" is misleading, because the behaviors and backgrounds have little, if any, similarity to those of primary psychopaths. Yet, both secondary and dyssocial psychopaths are often confused with primary psychopaths because of their high recidivism rates.
What are the conditions under which mentally disordered people may become violent or seriously criminal? Provide an overview of the DSM and the diagnoses that are most relevant to criminal behavior. Identify and include symptoms of the four diagnostic categories most relevant to criminal behavior. Be able to provide original examples of each.
The concept of mental disorder, therefore, connotes a wide range of bizarre, dramatic, harmful, or mildly unusual behaviors whose classifications are published in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Compiled by committees appointed by the American Psychiatric Association, the DSM—now in its 5th edition (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) is the guidebook for clinicians seeking to define and diagnose specific mental disorders. It is used by mental health professionals to guide diagnosis and to justify third-party reimbursement for treatment. Some prefer to use an alternative classification system, the International Classification of Disease (ICD)—published by the World Health Organization (WHO)—now in its 10th edition, with an 11th edition scheduled for release in 2015. It is important to note, though, that the DSM-5 is in closer alignment with the structure of the ICD than it has been in the past
What neurobiological deficits may contribute to psychopathy? In what was do psychopaths and non-psychopaths differ in terms of the neurobiological composition and functioning? How do these deficits make it "easier" for them to commit crime?
There is belief among the general public that psychopathic tendencies are caused exclusively by social factors, such as abuse and poor upbringing. However, researchers have implicated a variety of neurobiological factors as well. Contemporary research favors the view that psychopathic behavior results from a complex interaction between neuropsychological and learning or socialization factors. The neurobiological factors are crucial, however, and some research also has indicated that psychopathy may be an inherited condition
Know the components of each insanity standard and be familiar with alternative names for the different standards (e.g., cognitive test, product test).
Thus, the M'Naghten Rule, sometimes referred to as the right and wrong test, emphasizes the cognitive elements of (1) being aware and knowing what one was doing at the time of the illegal act or (2) knowing or realizing right from wrong in the moral sense. The rule recognizes no degree of incapacity. Either you are responsible for the action or you are not. There are no in-betweens.
What is a self-fulfilling prophecy?
a belief that leads to its own fulfillment
