Questions on Immigration and Gun Ownership

This chapter presents self-test questions on forensic psychiatry and law of immigration, and gun ownership.

Questions on Criminal Law and Incarceration

This chapter presents self-test questions and answers on criminal law and incarceration in forensic psychiatry, and includes criminal procedure, criminal competencies, diminished capacity, insanity, prisoners’ rights, the death penalty, and sex offenders.

Insanity

Chapter 25 relates to what is probably the most recognized, but perhaps the most rare, evaluation performed by a forensic professional. The pursuit of an insanity defense today is challenging and, in some states, not even permissible. These cases illustrate the evolution of the various state standards for establishing insanity (and therefore acquittal) for criminal defendants with mental illness. The following cases are included in this chapter: M’Naghten’s Case, Durham v. U.S., Washington v. U.S., Frendak v. U.S., Jones v. U.S., U.S. v. Torniero, Foucha v. Louisiana and Clark v. Arizona.

Diminished Capacity

Chapter 24 describes cases that have played an important role in establishing reduced culpability by criminal defendants. People v. Patterson involves mitigation defense called Extreme Emotional Distress (EED), Ibn-Tamas v. U.S. involves evidence of Battered Woman Syndrome to reduce culpability, and the final two cases, People v. Saille and Montana v. Egelhoff involve voluntary intoxication.

EAHCA (Education for All Handicapped Children Act); IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act)

Chapter 14 includes two cases involving the EAHCA, now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), that have heavily influenced the way public education is provided to school children with disabilities. Hendrick Hudson Board of Education v. Rowley helped to establish the requirements and limits of Individual Education Plans (IEP), a free academic service for any school child with a learning disability. Irving Independent School District v. Tatro, although specific to a child with spina bifida, helped to establish the medical care accommodations that a school must provide for a child with a physical disability.

Child Custody and Parental Competencies

Chapter 12 contains only two cases, Painter v. Bannister and Santosky v. Kramer, but these cases are extremely important in having established the important principles of “best interest of the child” for determining child custody arrangements and terminating parental rights based on “clear and convincing evidence.” The former overturned the idea that parental preference should drive custody decisions and the latter recognized the serious and potentially traumatic effects of removing a child from his/her parents.

Right to Treatment

Chapter 8 focuses on cases that involve the rights of individuals to receive adequate mental health treatment while involuntarily hospitalized either through civil commitment or insanity defense proceedings. These cases set the stage, many years ago, for environmental and clinical expectations of appropriate care. The cases in this chapter are Rouse v. Cameron, Wyatt v. Stickney, and Youngberg v. Romeo. Cases involving a right to treatment for prisoners are included in Chapter 25.

Civil Commitment

Chapter 6 covers the major legal cases that have informed the laws governing the civil commitment – involuntary hospitalization – of individuals with mental illness. The cases highlight the evolution of the emphasis on dangerousness as a critical factor in decision-making and very clearly describe the tension between individual autonomy and police power. The cases included in this chapter are Lake v. Cameron, Baxstrom v. Herold, Lessard v. Schmidt, O’Connor v. Donaldson, Addington v. Texas, and a case involving children, Parham v. J.R.

Immigration

Chapter 29 includes cases related to the rights of individuals subject to immigration proceedings, with particular focus on the right to be made aware of the potential immigration consequences of taking a guilty, competence to participate in the proceedings, and the related right to representation where competence is in question. While criminal case recommendations are beyond the purview of forensic practitioners, those involved in mental health diversion programs should be aware of the potential consequences of diversion participation for defendants at risk of deportation. In addition, forensic evaluators are called upon to opine about the impact of mental illness and/or cognitive disability on competence to participate in the immigration proceedings. The cases in this chapter include Padilla v. Kentucky and Matter of M-A-M.

Sexual Harassment

Chapter 19 describes cases that involve sexual harassment in the workplace. As a group, they have defined and applied such important concepts as a “hostile work environment” and “quid pro quo,” and have established standards that forensic practitioners need to know when conducting evaluations for cases involving sexual harassment. The cases in this chapter are Meritor Bank v. Vinson, Harris Forklift Systems, Inc. and Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.