The conditional release of insanity acquittees: three decades of decision-making.
The problem with the practical application of decision-making regarding release of mentally ill defenders lies in the inherently ambiguous definitions of mental illness and dangerousness, both of which are necessary for the continued commitment of insanity acquittees. In this study, we examined how clinicians make release decisions in a forensic facility, with particular attention paid to how such decision-making may have changed over time. Records were reviewed to determine documented criteria indicating readiness for release. The results indicated that compliance and treatment response were the primary reasons that the patients were judged ready for release. In addition, increasing attention to the use of substances as a risk factor was evident in the records, with substantially more documentation found in the most recent decade. Our data suggest that clinicians view three concerns to be of primary import when making release decisions: responsiveness to and compliance with the treatment, substance use, and risk of violence.
McDermott
Barbara E
BE
Department of Psychiatry, Division of Psychiatry and the Law, UC Davis School of Medicine, 2230 Stockton Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA. bemcdermott@ucdavis.edu
Scott
Charles L
CL
Busse
David
D
Andrade
Felecia
F
Zozaya
Michelle
M
Quanbeck
Cameron D
CD
D003617:Dangerous Behavior; D003659:Decision Making, Organizational; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007298:Insanity Defense; D007603:Jurisprudence; D013997:Time Factors; D014481:United States