Young People’s Knowledge and Understanding of the Youth Justice System in New Zealand: A Community Sample

<p>New Zealand (NZ) has a separate youth justice system that is designed to be responsive towards the developmental needs of young people that have engaged in antisocial behaviour. It is therefore essential that young people are ‘Fit to Stand Trial’ when legal proceedings are brought against them. A young person can be found legally unfit on the basis of ‘mental impairment’, and whilst this is undefined it largely overlooks the impact a young person's developmental level may have on their engagement with court processes. No research has examined young people’s understanding of the justice system in NZ. However, international research has demonstrated that those 13 years and younger are almost exclusively found unfit to stand trial due to their developmental level, whereas those 16 years and older tend to be found fit to stand trial. The legal capabilities of those aged 14 to 15 years are difficult to predict given the extensive developmental changes occurring around that age. The current research aimed to address three research questions: 1) is there a relationship between age and fitness to stand trial, 2) is there a relationship between IQ and fitness to stand trial, and 3) how does NZ research compare to international literature. Participants aged 13 to 18 were recruited from six schools around NZ (n = 89). They were interviewed using a semi-structured interview tool that was designed for this study to assess young people’s understanding of the justice process and fitness-related abilities. A brief measure of participant IQ was also taken. It was found that fitness-related abilities, such as knowledge and understanding, were positively associated with age and IQ, such that older participants and those with higher IQ scores performed better on this semi-structured interview. Attending a high decile school, and being female was also predictive of better performance. These findings indicate that developmental level—as indicated by age and IQ—impacts young people’s understanding and participation in the justice system. Therefore, the current legislative response to young people who offend does not sufficiently recognise the impact of a young person’s developmental capabilities.</p>

Young People’s Knowledge and Understanding of the Youth Justice System in New Zealand: A Community Sample

<p>New Zealand (NZ) has a separate youth justice system that is designed to be responsive towards the developmental needs of young people that have engaged in antisocial behaviour. It is therefore essential that young people are ‘Fit to Stand Trial’ when legal proceedings are brought against them. A young person can be found legally unfit on the basis of ‘mental impairment’, and whilst this is undefined it largely overlooks the impact a young person's developmental level may have on their engagement with court processes. No research has examined young people’s understanding of the justice system in NZ. However, international research has demonstrated that those 13 years and younger are almost exclusively found unfit to stand trial due to their developmental level, whereas those 16 years and older tend to be found fit to stand trial. The legal capabilities of those aged 14 to 15 years are difficult to predict given the extensive developmental changes occurring around that age. The current research aimed to address three research questions: 1) is there a relationship between age and fitness to stand trial, 2) is there a relationship between IQ and fitness to stand trial, and 3) how does NZ research compare to international literature. Participants aged 13 to 18 were recruited from six schools around NZ (n = 89). They were interviewed using a semi-structured interview tool that was designed for this study to assess young people’s understanding of the justice process and fitness-related abilities. A brief measure of participant IQ was also taken. It was found that fitness-related abilities, such as knowledge and understanding, were positively associated with age and IQ, such that older participants and those with higher IQ scores performed better on this semi-structured interview. Attending a high decile school, and being female was also predictive of better performance. These findings indicate that developmental level—as indicated by age and IQ—impacts young people’s understanding and participation in the justice system. Therefore, the current legislative response to young people who offend does not sufficiently recognise the impact of a young person’s developmental capabilities.</p>

Criminal Responsibility in Geropsychiatry: Competence, Culpability, and Care

Elderly persons can get involved in the criminal justice system as victims or as perpetrators. The interaction of elderly persons with mental illness at various cross-sections of the judicial process needs thoughtful consideration. Through this review, the authors approach this less studied aspect of forensic psychiatry. Concerning the evaluation of a prisoner, three scenarios need focused consideration: evaluation for fitness to stand trial before a competent court, evaluations for an insanity defense, and fitness for sentencing. At the same time, incarcerated elderly who developed dementia or a severe mental illness at any point of time during the trial or in prison need specific approaches. In this article, the authors discuss the acts and case laws relevant to navigating these legal scenarios. We discuss existing mental health care provisions for protecting the health interests of elderly care in prison.

Characteristics of persons accused of intimate partner homicide amongst forensic psychiatric observations

Background: Intimate partner homicide (IPH) is a global public health problem. One study conducted over 66 countries found that 13.5% of all homicides and 38.6% of female homicides were committed by an intimate partner. In South Africa, there were no published studies that examine alleged perpetrators of IPH that were referred for forensic psychiatric observation.Aim: To describe the profile of accused persons referred for forensic psychiatric observation for a charge of murder or attempted murder of their intimate partners. Certain characteristics were further examined according to the psychiatric observation outcomes.Setting: The study was conducted at Sterkfontein Hospital, a forensic psychiatric hospital in Gauteng, South Africa.Methods: A retrospective record review of accused persons referred for forensic psychiatric observation for a charge of murder or attempted murder of their intimate partners was conducted. The period of the review was 19 years. The definition of intimate partners included current or former spouses and partners, same-sex partners and rejected suitors.Results: One hundred and sixty-three files, which included forensic psychiatric reports, were reviewed. The findings related to the profile of accused persons and offence characteristics indicated that: (1) history of violent behaviour is prevalent; (2) homicides mostly occur in private homes; (3) knives and firearms are most often used; (4) infidelity, separation and jealousy are common motives; (5) psychotic disorders, personality disorders and substance use disorders feature prominently. A total of 88% of the sample were found fit to stand trial and 82% were found criminally responsible. Factors significantly associated with being found fit to stand trial and criminally responsible following the forensic psychiatric observation were: male gender, having received a tertiary education, employment prior to the offence, earning a salary of more than R10 000, having no previous psychiatric or medical illness, a positive forensic history, previous intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration, indicating a motive for the homicide, having no psychiatric illness at the time of the offence which would impact fitness to stand trial and criminal responsibility.Factors significantly associated with being found not fit to stand trial and not criminally responsible following the forensic psychiatric observation were: female gender, having received a primary education, unemployment prior to the offence, having a previous psychiatric or medical illness, no forensic history, no previous IPV perpetration, not indicating a motive for the homicide, having a psychiatric illness at the time of the offence which would impact fitness to stand trial and criminal responsibility.Conclusion: The characteristics highlighted in this study can contribute to the development of risk assessment tools which can be used to identify likely perpetrators of IPH. Other interventions, for example controlling access to knives and firearms, reducing substance abuse and improving mental health services, are also important in the prevention of IPH.