CURRENT LEGAL DOCTRINE ON CRIMINAL DEFENSES RELATING TO MENTAL DISABILITIES AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSE EITHER COMPLETELY EXCULPATE THE ACCUSED (INSANITY, UNCONSCIOUSNESS, AUTOMATISM), PARTIALLY EXCULPATE THE ACCUSED (INTOXICATION FROM ALCOHOL OR OTHER DRUGS, DIMINISHED MENTAL CAPACITY), OR HAVE AS YET ERRATIC EXCULPATORY FORCE (ADDICTION TO ALCOHOL OR OTHER DRUGS). IN CURRENT CRIMINAL LAW, THE ISSUE OF MENTAL DISABILITY IS CONFUSED BY AN ARRAY OF SPECIAL DEFENSES, LEGAL DOCTRINES, AND PROCEDURES AND FORMS OF VERDICT; THE LATTER ARE OFTEN LINKED ERRATICALLY WITH POSTVERDICT DISPOSITIONAL ISSUES, ALL OF WHICH CAN VARY FROM ONE JURISDICTION TO ANOTHER. THE DESIRABILITY OF A UNIFIED AND REALISTIC BASIC DOCTRINE FOR ASSESSING THE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MENTALLY DISABLED IS APPARENT. A PROPOSAL CALLED THE DISABILITY OF MIND DOCTRINE IS A NEW APPROACH FOR EXPRESSING THE DISTINCTIVE MORAL AND LEGAL BASIS FOR LESSENING OR NEGATING CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY WHERE THERE IS MENTAL DISABILITY. THE DOCTRINE IS BASICALLY DERIVED FROM THREE LINKED INTUITIONS: (1) SOMEONE WHOSE BEHAVIOR HAS ITS SOURCE IN A DERANGED MIND IS NOT IN THAT RESPECT ACTING AS A RESPONSIBLE PERSON AND CANNOT BE JUDGED MORALLY CULPABLE FOR OFFENSES COMMITTED; (2) IF A PERSON CULPABLY PRODUCES A DERANGEMENT OF MIND, AS FOR EXAMPLE IN THE EXCESSIVE USE OF ALCOHOL OR DRUGS, THAT ORIGINATING RESPONSIBLE ACT SHOULD BE PLACED IN BALANCE IN ASSESSING THE ULTIMATE CULPABILITY OF THE OFFENDER; AND (3) REGARDLESS OF CULPABILITY, IF MENTAL DISABILITY IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN THE SOURCE OF CRIMINALLY PROHIBITED BEHAVIOR, THE PERSON SO DISABLED SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO POSTVERDICT MENTAL EXAMINATION AND, WHERE SUITABLY SHOWN TO BE NECESSARY, SUBJECT TO MEDICAL OR OTHER SUPERVISION UNDER APPROPRIATE LEGAL AND SOCIAL POLICIES. THE APPENDIXES PROVIDE A SUGGESTED MODEL FOR BOTH JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND THE ENGLISH LAW CONTEXT FOR THE DISABILITY-OF-MIND DOCTRINE. A BIBLIOGRAPHY AND INDEX ARE PROVIDED.