Empirical research on the insanity defense and attempted reforms: Evidencetoward informed policy (vol 23, pg 117, 1999)

The paper addresses some common questions about the insanity defense and is sues raised by commonly proposed "reforms.'' The ;rst section begins with a brief description of the insanity defense and the reasons for its existenc e in the law. It then examines some of the popular myths and public misperc eptions surrounding the insanity defense. The next three sections discuss p roposed "reforms" and the empirical research that addresses their effect. T hese reforms, including various procedural changes in definitions, burden o f proof; and expert testimony, the institution of a guilty but mentally ill verdict, and the abolition of the insanity defense itself are reviewed, al ong with relevant research findings and policy issues. Finally, the develop ment of sound conditional release programs for criminal defendants found no t guilty by reason of insanity is proposed as a reform option which could s erve the objectives of enhancing public safety and access to appropriate tr eatment while continuing to meet the objectives of the insanity defense wit hin criminal jurisprudence.