Forensic Psychology Essay

1.How often is the delirium defending team used and how successful is it?I would like to answer this question, with the presentation of my opinion and the performed research. It is within my opinion, that the insanity defence force is used over excessively and is taking part in almost every defense to each plague. Offenders seem to have the knowledge to the use of this defense and will often provide a acknowledgment to culpable by insanity or temporary insanity, within the faith, to receive a reduced sentence. darn insanity has to be a proven fact and a psychologist has to conduct a variety of tests to prolong the offender is suffering from a mental incompetence or insanity, most offenders have the ability to misguide or deceive psychologists to receive the evaluation they seek.such(prenominal) action, if discovered, would actually prove the sanity of such(prenominal) offenders, scarcely in most cases, it cannot be ascertained. The success of such defense is, within my view , very effective. The performed research is bring out a different answer. According to the St. Joseph News Press (2007), it has stated the opposite to my opinion. This article within a study of the national mental health institute claims the insanity defense confession is used in less than one (1) percent of wrong cases in the United States and less than a quarter of those pleas are successful. Retrieved from St. Joseph News Press (2007). With these opinions and views in combination, one would have to conduct come along studies on this subject, to establish the correct answer. Everyone has different sentiments, within the use of the insanity defense and the successfulness of such validation.2. Identify and discuss the major criticisms of the insanity defense. It is my belive,the major criticism of the insanity defense could be the innovation of prove to the claim of insanity. More often, offenders will try to make use of this defense for the hope of receiving a reduced sentence or the sentence to receive institutional occupy. According to my research, there are threesome (3) major criticisms within the insanity defense.The Insanity defense is mentioned as confusing to the psychiatric and legal concept. Furthermore, it is explained that the expression insane is more of a legal word, then a medical term, and therefor to prove a person or a criminal insane, one must find the mental condition, of a criminal, sternly impaired to the point of losing ones free will. A psychiatrist may be or may not able to determine such illness, and a jurys decision alone based on a psychiatrists opinion may be grounded on unreliable evidence. Retrieved from Wests encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2 (2008). 2. This criticism is on the moral basis and the consequences. This section suggests that the crime is of more importance, then the moral imperatives. It also addresses the way a criminal, who does plea insanity, should be trialed and punished for the crime.It is su ggested, that the criminal should be convicted and the mental illness should be make forn in consideration at the time of sentencing. If this system would be used by the court, it would allow the judge to determine the length of imprisonment, within a infirmary prison, and the defendant would have to provide prove of improvement to the once dangerous behavior. Retrieved from Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2 (2008).3. This last criticism, is turned to the rich and wealthy criminals, who make use of the insanity plea. It is argued only wealthy defendant have the ability to retain a high-priced psychiatrist, who may be able to declare the defendant insane with the performed examination. It also is believed, people who have less monetary funds and depend on the defense of a public defender, will not receive the alike(p) quality of defense, and they are also unable to receive the same value within the insanity exam. Such critic is based on the suggestion, that the insani ty defense should be eliminated. Retrieved from Wests Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2 (2008).3. When a mentally ill person is convicted and incarcerated, what are some of the difficulties in providing subdue psychological treatment for these offenders? The difficulties in providing appropriate care, to a incarcerated mentally ill person, would stand to the inappropriate care and knowledge of the staff or facility personnel, to the condition of the mentally ill. A prison or tuck away is not equipped nor can such establishment provide the correct treatment to the mentally ill. To take in consideration the staff and the excess medical treatment such person would require, every day, term in such confinement.But the alternative to this problem is stated in Wrightsmans Psychology and the statutory System, 6e,(2011) in which it is proposed When defendants are found incompetent to stand trial, they can be committed for a gunpoint of treatment designed to restore their competen ce. And also for dealing with the unrestorably incompetent criminal defendant accommodate her or his waiving the right to be found incompetent to proceed to trial and using a special form of commitment for incompetent defendants who are judged at a provisional trial to be guilty of the crimes with which they are charged. Retrieved from Wrightsmans Psychology and the Legal System, 6e, pg 249 (2011). It is my believe, the above suggested method, would be the better approach to the enslavement of incompetent or the mentally ill offenders.