Mental Disability and Criminal Justice

According to the Law and Justice Foundation’s Access to Justice and Legal Needs (A2JLN) research, cognitive impairment has consistently been identified as a chief factor impacting criminal proceedings and legal needs at an individual level. This report examines cognitive impairment in the context of criminal proceedings in order to determine how mental disorder may be addressed throughout the process. Furthermore, this report provides commentary on the impact of the Flynn effect within the criminal justice system.

Within the UK, mental health issues in criminal procedures are filtered through the regulatory lens of the Mental Health Act of 2007. The Mental Health Act defines learning disability, learning difficult, brain injury, and other relevant designations that have an impact on criminal proceedings within the wider criminal justice system. When addressing issues concerning mental health in a criminal proceeding, all stakeholders must refer back to the Mental Health Act.

Relevance of a specific disability to an offence is dependent upon a number of factors. Furthermore, the presence of combined disorder may reframe the significance of disorders in relation to a specific offense. The presence of mental disorder has an immediate impact on the evidential stage. It is the duty of the prosecutor to determine whether or not the presence of mental disorder may impact the ability to convict in regards to the viability of certain evidence. At this stage it may be determined that there is not enough evidence to proceed with the case due to the mental condition of the defendant.

If it is determined that there is sufficient evidence to convict in light of the presence of mental disorder or psychopathy, the prosecutor must then determine whether or not the conviction would be significant to the public interest. Once again, mental disorder is consider relevant at this stage of the criminal proceeding and therefore it must be taken into account when making a determination of the significance to the public interest. It is important at this point to recognize the need for balance between the individual needs of the defendant and the need to safeguard the public from future harm.

In the presence of mental disorder, the decision to prosecute proceeds along the basic line of development until the prosecution reaches the point at which the question of the impact of disorder on the procedure becomes relevant. The point of relevancy varies depending upon the nature of the assessment. Throughout each stage of the procedure, the defendant’s mental fitness must be taken into account. The mental fitness of the defendant may be determined through a variety of analytical strategies including interview, formal psychological assessment, review of past medical history, testimony, and other methods.

Examining the wider scope of the issue of mental disorder in the context of social systems, the Flynn effect has had a profound impact on the designation of disorder. The Flynn effect refers to the upward trend of IQ scores in the 20th century. As a result of the Flynn effect, IQ tests have been recalibrated to more accurately represent intelligence. Due to the reliance upon IQ tests in determining the presence of mental disorder, specifically mental retardation, the Flynn effect has disrupted classification procedures of mental disorder. As it stands, it may be necessary to consider future reform efforts to reduce the impact of the Flynn effect on criminal procedures involving individuals with cognitive impairments.

Bibliography

Clarke, S., Forell, S. and Gray, A. ‘Cognitive impairment, legal need and access to justice’, Justice Issues, vol. 10, 2009.

CPS. ‘Mental health conditions and disorders: draft prosecution guidance’, Crown Prosecution Service, 2019.

Kanaya, T., Scullin, M.H. and Ceci, S.J. ‘The Flynn effect and US policies: the impact of rising IQ scores on American society via mental retardation diagnoses’, American Psychologist, vol. 58, no. 10.