abnormal PSYCHOLOGY Third Canadian Edition Prepared by: Tracy Vaillancourt, Ph.D. Chapter 18 Legal and Ethical Issues

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Criminal vs. Civil Commitment Charter of Rights and Freedoms— includes provisions that allow for people to be removed from society if they act in a way that infringes on the rights of others Criminal commitment—procedure that may confine a person in a mental institution –for determination of competency to stand trial –or after a verdict of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder Civil commitment—procedure by which mentally ill who may not have broken a law can be deprived of liberty and incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital

Criminal Commitment Much of Canadian law has derived from English common law –exception is Quebec Napoleonic law incorporated into civil statutes Criminal law is a matter of federal statute –same in every province

NCRMD NCRMD—Not criminally responsible for their acts on account of mental disorder –Defendant should not be held responsible for an otherwise illegal act if it is attributable to mental illness that interferes with rationality or that results in some other excusing circumstance (p.602) not knowing right from wrong –Mental disorder may operate to negate requisite mental element (mens rea) or act (actus reus) involuntary

Insanity Defence Very rare Usually only successful when applied to severely disordered individuals People found to be insane typically detained for long periods of time

Landmark Cases in Canada

M’Naghten Rules Formulated in aftermath of 1843 murder trial in England Daniel M’Naghten set out to kill British prime minister Sir Robert Peel –Killed Sir Edward Drummond by mistake Claimed that instructed to kill Lord Peel by “voice of God”

M’Naghten Rules cont. “To establish a defence of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong” (p.603).

Insanity and Mental Illness Insanity is a legal term Criminal Code of Canada defines “mental disorder” to mean “disease of the mind” Insanity Defence— mental disorder is a necessary but not a sufficient condition

Fitness to Stand Trial Insanity defence concerns the accused person’s mental state at the time of the crime –BUT question that first arises is whether the person is competent or fit to stand trial Fit to stand trial = physically and mentally present Note. it is possible for a person to be judged competent to stand trial and yet NCRMD Fitness Interview Test- Revised 1.Does the person understand nature and purpose of legal proceedings? 2.Does the person understands the possible or likely consequences of proceedings? 3.Is the person capable of communicating with his/her lawyer?

Civil Commitment Government has right to protect us both from ourselves (parens patriae) and from others Person can be committed to a psychiatric hospital against will if judgment made that person is: –1) mentally ill and 2) a danger to self or others 2 categories of commitment: –Formal By order of the court –Informal

Involuntary Admission

Community Treatment Orders

Risk Assessment Prediction of Dangerousness –central to civil commitment Is dangerousness easily predicted? –mental health professionals poor at making judgement –ability of clinicians to predict recidivism among sex offenders only slightly better than chance

Trends Toward Greater Protection Choosing Among Ethical Principles –Respect for the dignity of persons –Responsible caring –Integrity in relationships –Responsibility to society Right to Treatment –O’Connor v. Donaldson (1975) Right to Refuse Treatment –Regina v. Rogers (1991) –Starson v. Swayze (2003) –Establishing a person’s prior capable

Ethics in Therapy and Research Informed consent Confidentiality –nothing will be revealed to a third party, except to other professionals and those intimately involved in the treatment Privileged Communication –communication b/w parties in a confidential relationship that is protected by law Husband and wife Physician and patient Pastor and penitent Attorney and client Psychologist and patient –Limits to a client’s right of privileged communication Example: Duty to warn and protect

Other Things to Consider Who is the Client or Patient? Choice of Goals Choice of Techniques Right to Competent Treatment

Copyright Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. All rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of this work beyond that permitted by Access Copyright (The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency) is unlawful. Requests for further information should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. The purchaser may make back-up copies for his or her own use only and not for distribution or resale. The author and the publisher assume no responsibility for errors, omissions, or damages caused by the use of these programs or from the use of the information contained herein.