Capacity of the Mentally Ill to Conclude Contracts

The incarceration of those who are mentally ill is on the continual rise. Many states juggle with the decision of placing offenders in Mental Hospital or locating them in State Prisons. Latessa and Holsinger (2011) discuss two major reasons for the increase of those with mental illness within the prison system. First, many states have no longer allow for the insanity plea during criminal trials, thus those who suffer from mental illness are not required to receive mandatory mental treatment. This is due to the discomforting idea that criminal offenders should not be given the same living conditions as those whom are patients of mental wards. Secondly, longer sentences have created a surplus of mentally ill offenders needing treatment. Soderstrom (2007) added that the lack of mental health support systems in

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 suggested, that the criminal should be convicted and the mental illness should be taken in consideration at the time of sentencing. If this method would be used by the court, it would allow the judge to determine the length of imprisonment, within a hospital prison, and the defendant would have to provide prove of improvement to the once dangerous behavior. Retrieved from; West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2 (2008).

The shutdown of state mental hospitals and lack of available financial and institutional resources force mentally ill people to the United States Judicial System for mental health. Every year thousands of people are arrested for various crimes and they are sent to jail. Sixteen percent of these people have some type of mental health problem (Public Broadcasting System , 2001). When we consider that the United States has the largest incarcerated population in the world at 2.2 million, this number is staggering (Anasseril E. Daniel, 2007). This is about 1% of the entire population of the United States. There are many reasons as to why the situation has taken such a bad turn and when the history of the treatment of mental illness is examined one can see how the situation developed into the inhumane disaster it is today.

Mental Illness - The prisoner’s moral culpability for his offending is reduced by reason of his mental illness and the objective

A contract is a legally obligatory promise or set of promises (Bagley, C. 2013). If this promise is broken, either party involved can be legally responsible and take the other party to court. There are four basic elements in the creation of a valid contract. The first consist of an agreement between the parties involved, by an presented offer and acceptance. The second states that the parties’ promises must be supported by something of worth, known as consideration. The third advises both parties must have the ability to enter into a contract. The fourth element states the contract must have a legal purpose (Bagley, C 2013).

Within contemporary society, the legal process of placing an individual into a detention or psychatric treatment facility is called "civil commitment." Typically, this is reserved for the mentally ill, or those people who have satisfied the Court's rule that they are a danger to others, or to themselves. Society realizes that, at times, an individual may pose a danger to themselves or to society and be unable to make rational decisions. In fact, in most jurisdictions in the modern world, involuntary commitment procedures are specifically applied to individuals who have manifested some form of serious mental illness that acts to impair their reasoning to such extent that they are unable to make cogent and logical decisions. Therefore, at these times the state (the Court system) must intercede to find ways to make the appropriate decisions under a legal template. Involuntary commitment may have, in the past, been used in certain situations, inappropriately, but the statutory criteria that indicates one is a danger to self or others usually acts as a legal axiom (Korba, 2008).

It has long been acknowledged that an offender who as a result to mental disorder, is incapable of understanding the nature and quality of a criminal act, or of recognizing that it was wrong, should not be convicted. Bill C-54 the Not Criminally Responsible Reform Act deals with the accused who has been found Criminally Responsible because of mental disorder. Not Criminally Responsible (NCR) is defined in Section 16 of the Canadian Criminal Code, stating that if someone is deemed NCR he or she cannot be held accountable for the offence they’ve committed, merely if at that time they were suffering through a mental disorder. The Bill will enact three main factors which will affect the mental disorder regime

Psychological disorders are common in the United States and worldwide. The National institute of mental Health discovered that, “An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.” Having an uncle who was diagnosed with Schizophrenia in 2003 has changed the way I see people with mental illnesses. After reading and watching the documentary about prisoners who have to undergo medication just to live a “normal” life has given me inspiration to come up with a few ways that will help our justice system deal with these sorts of individuals. While researchers are trying to come up with different medical measures to cure these diseases we as individuals can implement some procedures to help and support mental patients.

The current method to heal mentally ill patients in the United States is mostly done through forced medication. Elyn Saks believes there may be a better way to help the men and women suffering with a mental illness than forced medication. “The Consent Dilemma” shows how the current method of forced medication is outdated and how there is a more effective method to help people that have a mental illness. All the rhetoric devices are used in “The Consent Dilemma” by Elyn Saks in the magazine Politico. The rhetoric devices are used to show that the current system used to help the mentally ill is in need of an update.

Courts and the jurors serving in them need to be cautious when listening to expert testimony given, regarding the mental capabilities or sanity of an individual. This is because it is impossible to go into the mind of the defendant and know for a fact that they are mentally capable, which causes any assessment to be in part guesswork. Also the definition of what the judiciary has considered mentally insane has changed through time and in different legal systems. I argue that expert testimony in cases regarding mental sanity is not uniform and varies in different instances. As a society should be trying to make the definitions and assessment of sanity the uniform in all of the states and United States federal courts for persons to be tried

For the purpose of this week’s discussion, I decided to confer the Lanterman Petris Short Act, endorsed in 1968 in California, thus founding particular necessities for the proviso of mental health facilities in the civic. In addition, the circumstances are establishments of unintentional confinement by peace officers and individuals elected by the Act. The Lanterman Petris Short Act, is for individuals, “who,” are to be austerely disable, and threaten harm to themselves, and others around them; therefore, individuals could possibly be taken into protective watch for 72 hours, in the effect of mental malady (Moore, 2015).

Since the beginning of Anglo-American law, the proposition that some criminal defendants should not be found guilty of their crimes by reason of mental instability has been a well established judicial action throughout centuries of jurisdiction. Even though the original intent of this practice was to soften the harsh consequences of capital punishments, the psychiatric state of persons convicted of crimes quickly became an important mechanism of social regulation. The justification for this mechanism lies in the assumption that the criminally insane are irrational and therefore non-responsible of their crimes. As we examine the history and implications of the insanity plea, a few questions should be kept in mind---1. How can we be sure

Image a life where you have difficulty defending yourself and nobody can clearly understand you. Now visualize trying to convince others that you are innocent of a crime. Since the early 80s, more than sixty mentally ill criminals have been executed the US (Mental Illness on Death Row). This paper will discuss the relationship between the law and the challenges faced by mentally criminals from tries to appeals and execution. It provides examples of some of the more famous cases of the execution of the mentally ill and describes current legislative. But we would try answer the whether the mentally disabled criminals should be charged with a death penalty. Throughout this paper, we will use Borromeo 's definition of someone with mental issues. He stated "mental retardation is a lifelong condition of impaired or incomplete mental development..." ( Borromeo 178). Some examples of these illnesses include but are not limited to major depression, bipolar disorder, post traumatic stress disorder and borderline personality disorder .

Examines join involuntary outpatient commitment with enhanced patient results, filling debate on its moral defense.The survey thinks about inpatient usage for conferred outpatients in the 1990s with the individuals who were not under outpatient civil commitment orders. Discoveries uncover submitted outpatients had higher usage of inpatient administrations and restriction scenes preceding their dedication contrasted and a control catagory. Commitment outpatients likewise will probably have been on release status at the time of confirmation, have been admitted automatically under crisis legitimate strategies, and have had a more prominent number of admissions and clinic days before their dedication. Taking after responsibility, patients had less hospitalizations, shorter lengths of stay, less isolation scenes and hours, and less restriction scenes and hours. Discoveries are talked about inside of the connection of parens patriae and helpful jurisprudence, and hold on therapeutic and public policy supports for moral needers of outpatient civil commitment laws for genuinely mentally illness individuals

The world is facing an emergency in the area of human rights in the mental health sector as human rights of the people with mental disabilities have been violating (World Health Organisation). . Many countries in the world and Australia itself have legislation to treat a person with mental illness against his/her wish or without their consent which is the abuse of their basic human rights. The mental health legislation which is called Involuntary Treatment Orders involves treatment and detention of people with mental illness against their wish and it is total violation of the rights of people with mental illness who are subjected to these treatment orders. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD) recognizes that people with disabilities should have freedom from torture and will be given the right to make their own decisions (Barriga, 2013). Therefore, the mental health legislation in Australia also being reviewed by a number of Australian governments in the light of principles set out in UNCRPD (Mcsherry & Wilson, 2015). Consequently, there are some provisions have been made in the recent mental health reform specially to involuntary treatment orders to empower consumers rights which are going to be discussed in the following essay. The Mental health Act 2014 is the major aspect of mental health reform to promote recovery-oriented practice, minimise the use and duration of compulsory treatment, safeguard the rights and dignity of people