The detection of malingered amnesia in accused murderers.

Abstract

Malingering, as defined by DSM-III, involves voluntary production and presentation of false or grossly exaggerated physical or psychological symp­ toms. The symptoms are produced in pursuit of a goal that is obviously recognizable with an understanding of the individual's circumstances rather than of his or her psychopathology. Whenever an individual is evaluated in forensic settings, psychiatrists have to look at malingering as a possible diagnosis because a patient may present psychotic symptomatology or amnesia to avoid being considered fit to stand trial or to escape responsibility for his/her actions. The object of this article is to discuss characteristics of true amnesia versus malingered amnesia in men charged with first-degree or capital murder. A defendant who malingers and convinces a psychiatrist that he has amnesia has won a Pyrhhic victory, because courts will not find a person incompetent to stand trial or not responsible for the crime because of amnesia alone. A primary reason for this policy is the concern that many defendants would escape punishment or being brought to trial by malinger­ ing amnesia, which is easy to do and hard to detect. I If a method to detect malingered amnesia was developed, the legal policy concerning it could be changed to benefit those with true amnesia. In most studies of amnesia, memory loss is considered to be genuine only if it has an organic base. Possible psychogenic bases are rarely considered as sufficient evidence to accept the alleged amnesia as genuine. In several studies the alleged amnesia was judged to be malingered solely upon the absence of evidence for organic etiology or the presence of a history of lying. 2 - 5 Review of the literatuce reveals that the relationship of amnesia to crime has been discussed for many years. The incidence of amnesia in accused murderers has been reported to be anywhere from 10 to 70 percent. 6 - 8 In

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 56 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.