Antisocial backgrounds of defendants evaluated for insanity: A research note

Abstract

Defendants evaluated for criminal responsibility have received much attention regarding their sociodemographic characteristics (Pasewark, 1981; Steadman, 1985), post-acquittal disposition (Weiner, 1985), and how their assessment was conducted (Rogers, 1986). Comparatively little attention has focused on the antisocial backgrounds of these defendants including developmental and adult symptoms of antisocial personality disorder. This neglect is largely due to the relative infrequency of insanity evaluations and the descriptive nature of early studies. The basic role of clinicians in criminal responsibility assessments is generally to assist the court in determining who is bad and who is mad. At present, no empirical data exist which systematically compare antisocial personality characteristics of those clinically evaluated as sane and insane. If the antisocial backgrounds of these two groups are comparable, then the distinction between bad and mad is likely to be blurred. Available research on antisocial personality characteristics of insanity acquittees have been limited to an examination of prior arrests. Pasewark (1981) in a review of studies from New York, Wyoming, Michigan, and Missouri found that 47% to 74% of defendants acquitted as NGRI (i.e., not guilty by reason of insanity) had at least one prior arrest. Steadman and Braff (1983) compared the prior arrest histories of defendants adjudged insane and those found guilty. Their results suggested that the majority of defendants had at least one prior arrest (57% for NGRI’s and 70% for those convicted) with a non-significant trend towards fewer arrests among NGRI’s (i.e., an average of 3.5 for NGRI’s and 4.7 for those convicted). Finally, Steadman (1985) found no significant differences in either criminal history or the details of the target offence for those adjudicated insane and those convicted. Prior criminal history apparently has some effect both on clinical recommendations and legal outcomes of criminal responsibility evaluations. Rogers, Seman, and Stampley (1984) studied variables associated with clinical recommendations of non-responsibility in insanity assessments. They found that