PUNISHMENT/TREATMENT OF MENTALLY ILL OFFENDERS
This research paper discusses and compares similarities and
differences in the handling (punishment and/or treatment) of criminal defendants with mental disorders (mentally disordered offenders or MDOs) internationally, particularly in the United States, Great Britain and Scandinavia.
In dealing with MDOs, all societies have faced the necessity of protecting society from their criminal actions while also attempting to cure/rehabilitate them. In general, custodial isolation in the interests of public safety has been given priority over mental health treatment, largely due to public fear of, and indifference toward, MDOs and gross disparities between their therapeutic needs and available resources and facilities. Due to their differing cultural values, legal systems and mental health policies, the United States, Great Britain and the Scandinavian nations have pursued different approaches to MDOs; however, the criminal justice systems of all three areas are moving in the direction of diverting MDOs as much as possible away from traditional modes of punishment and toward more effective treatment for their disorders.
Winston Churchill said that "the mood and temper of the public with respect to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilisation of any country" (Hibbert, 1963, p. 131). No class of criminals has posed more of a social dilemma than those law breakers who are mentally unbalanced. For centuries they have been regarded as a threat to society. Many MDOs have been resistent to medical treatment and prone to recidivism. Hibbert said that in Europe in the Middle Ages "even raving lunatics [who had committed crimes] were sometimes hanged;" and "they were frequently flogged, to drive the devils out of them" (p. 201). Worth (2000) said that the basic concept underlying the insanity defense in criminal trials is that "it is unfair to ...