This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Richard M. Glass, MD

JAMA. 1985;253(3):399.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THE JOURNAL performed a valuable service by publishing the full report of the American Medical Association Committee on Medicolegal Problems regarding the insanity defense,¹ along with the COMMENTARIES describing recommendations by the American Bar Association (ABA)² and the American Psychiatric Association (APA)³ for reform of the insanity defense. Readers were provided with clear expositions of the AMA position favoring the substitution of a mens rea approach for the special defense of insanity and of the ABA and APA positions favoring a tightened insanity defense based on inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of one's conduct at the time of the offense. The real issues were addressed in those articles.

Unfortunately, this is certainly not the case in Dr Borelli's COMMENTARY, "Abolition Not Reform."⁴ The opinions expressed in that article do not actually deal with the difficult problems embodied in the insanity defense. Furthermore, those opinions present an . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
University of Chicago

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?