skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 136660 Find in a Library
Title: Multiple Personality Disorder: Has This Trendy Alibi Lost Its Way?
Journal: Law and Psychology Review  Volume:15  Dated:(Spring 1991)  Pages:351-373
Author(s): J O Radwin
Date Published: 1991
Page Count: 23
Type: Legislation/Policy Description
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: A defense attorney faces several obstacles when trying to defend a client who claims a multiple personality disorder excuse for his or her crime.
Abstract: Obstacles to a defense of multiple personality disorder include doubts on the part of both the psychological and legal communities about whether the defendant suffers from the disorder or whether he or she is trying to escape a conviction, the problems of trying to align the disorder within a recognized legal excuse defense, and the burden of persuading the court and overcoming the burden of proof even if the elements of the defense are met. The ethical role of the defense lawyer in defending a client who has been properly diagnosed as suffering from multiple personality disorder involves ensuring that treatment is initiated for the defendant after the trial as well as protecting his or her legal rights. The obstacles may not loom so large if the defendant's goal is to receive treatment. 192 footnotes
Main Term(s): Insanity defense; Mental disorders
Index Term(s): Appellate court decisions; Competency to stand trial; Psychological evaluation; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.