A new report from the Charlotte School of Law on men­tal ill­ness and the death penal­ty reveals that obsta­cles entrenched with­in the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem impede efforts to iden­ti­fy those with severe men­tal ill­ness and treat them fair­ly. The report, ​“Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach,” is based on a 2006 sym­po­sium host­ed by the law school. It exam­ines sci­en­tif­ic stud­ies of men­tal ill­ness and pro­vides an overview of laws estab­lished to pro­tect those with men­tal ill­ness from unjust­ly fac­ing the death penal­ty. The report con­cludes that cur­rent legal pro­tec­tions are inad­e­quate, in large part because men­tal­ly ill offend­ers are often allowed to under­mine their own defense. Additionally, the legal def­i­n­i­tions of men­tal incom­pe­tence which might spare a per­son from the death penal­ty do not align with clin­i­cal judg­ments that med­ical prac­ti­tion­ers have to make. Moreover, jurors in death penal­ty cas­es often per­ceive men­tal ill­ness as an aggra­vat­ing — rather than a mit­i­gat­ing — factor. 

The report con­cludes that a series of reforms are nec­es­sary to build a con­sen­sus between the sci­ence of men­tal ill­ness and the law. In addi­tion to its reform rec­om­men­da­tions, the report high­lights cas­es of men­tal­ly ill North Carolina defen­dants who have been sen­tenced to death. The report pro­vides res­o­lu­tions on this sub­ject from the American Bar Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, and the American Psychiatric Association.
(“Mental Illness and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: A Diagnostic Approach,” Charlotte School of Law, 2007). See Mental Illness and the Death Penalty.

Citation Guide