Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Causation, compulsion, and involuntariness

S J Morse1

  • 1University of Pennsylvania Law School, Philadelphia.

The Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
|January 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Craziness and criminal responsibility.

Behavioral sciences & the law·1999
Same author

Niacin reaction: common vitamin, uncommon ED diagnosis.

The American journal of emergency medicine·1999
Same author

Will you and your contract meet in court?

IMJ. Illinois medical journal·1988
Same author

AIDS and the law.

IMJ. Illinois medical journal·1987
Same author

In pursuit of professional freedom 2.

IMJ. Illinois medical journal·1986
Same author

Revolution comes slowly to the law. 1.

IMJ. Illinois medical journal·1986

Causation does not equal compulsion, and neither is an automatic excuse. Many excuses like "irresistible impulse" are better understood as rationality problems, especially when caused internally.

Area of Science:

  • Legal Psychology
  • Philosophy of Law
  • Forensic Psychiatry

Background:

  • Distinguishing causation from excuse is crucial in legal and ethical contexts.
  • The concept of 'compulsion' as a legal defense is frequently misunderstood.
  • Existing frameworks struggle to adequately assess excuses related to volitional control.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To clarify the distinction between causation and excuse.
  • To analyze the complexities surrounding defenses like 'compulsion' or 'irresistible impulse'.
  • To propose a more effective framework for assessing internal causes of excusing conditions.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of legal and psychological terminology.
  • Examination of case law and forensic assessments.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Critique of current diagnostic and assessment practices for volitional impairments.

    • Main Results:

    • Causation is demonstrated not to be equivalent to compulsion.
    • Causation in itself does not constitute an excusing condition.
    • Excuses based on internal causes (e.g., 'irresistible impulse') are often poorly understood and assessed.
    • Rationality problems offer a more effective lens for assessing these conditions.

    Conclusions:

    • Legal and forensic professionals must differentiate causation from excuse more rigorously.
    • The 'compulsion' defense requires re-evaluation, particularly when rooted in internal factors.
    • Assessing excusing conditions through the lens of rationality problems enhances clarity and accuracy in forensic evaluations.