Abstract
Defendants can deny they have agency, and thus responsibility, for a crime by using a defense of mental impairment. We argue that although this strategy may help defendants evade blame, it may carry longer-term social costs, as lay people’s perceptions of a person’s agency might determine some of the moral rights they grant them. In this registered report protocol, we seek to expand upon preliminary findings from two pilot studies to examine how and why those using the defense of mental impairment are seen as less deserving of certain rights. The proposed study uses a hypothetical vignette design, varying the type of mental impairment, type of crime, and type of sentence. Our design for the registered study improves on various aspects of our pilot studies and aims to rigorously test the reliability and credibility of our model. The findings have implications for defendants claiming reduced agency through legal defenses, as well as for the broader study of moral rights and mind perception.
Highlights
A defense of mental impairment—available in most Western democratic legal systems [1]— recognizes the principle that people lacking full mental capacity should be excused from criminal responsibility
Using this defense may come with a hidden cost. In denying their agency mentally impaired defendants may initially absolve themselves of blame, but they may lose certain rights and freedoms conferred to moral agents
We test for two main predictions: that the defense of mental impairment will reduce responsibility at the time of the trial, and that it will reduce rights after release
Summary
A defense of mental impairment—available in most Western democratic legal systems [1]— recognizes the principle that people lacking full mental capacity should be excused from criminal responsibility. Using this defense may come with a hidden cost. In denying their agency (the capacity to engage in intentional action [2]) mentally impaired defendants may initially absolve themselves of blame, but they may lose certain rights and freedoms conferred to moral agents. The current research examines the potential negative consequences of lost agency for those using the defense of mental impairment, in terms of others’ moral regard of such defendants.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
