Article Sidebar
Published:
Mar 22, 2018Article Details
http://www.sajp.org.za/index.php/sajp/pages/view/policies#part_4
Copyright
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publishing rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose.
AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
Read more here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Main Article Content
Forensic psychiatric assessment process and outcome in state patients in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Abstract
Background: Individuals who were charged with a serious offence may be referred by courts for forensic psychiatric assessment. The court may declare them as state patients if they are found unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible because of mental illness or defect.
In forensic psychiatry practice, there may be challenges in the forensic psychiatric observation process, and discrepancies may occur between the clinician report and the court’s decision.
Objectives: To describe elements of the forensic psychiatric observation and discuss the legal correlates associated with the admission of state patients.
Method: A retrospective study of the forensic psychiatric observation records of 91 newly admitted state patients at a forensic unit in KwaZulu-Natal over a 3-year period.
Results: A total of 71 state patients (78.02%) were found not fit to stand trial and 10 patients (10.99%) were not criminally responsible. Nine patients (9.89%) were fit to stand trial and criminally responsible but still declared state patients and 13 state patients (14.29%) did not commit a serious offence. There was correlation for diagnosis between the assessing and the treating psychiatrists.
Conclusion: The findings of the forensic observation were not always considered by the courts. Individuals found fit to stand trial, those found criminally responsible and those who did not commit serious crimes were declared state patients.
A better understanding of legal dispositions for mentally ill offenders and an active collaboration between judicial and mental health systems may contribute in developing national guidelines for observation and admission of state patients.
