Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Treating incompetence to stand trial

  • Articles
  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

InJackson v. Indiana (1972), the United States Supreme Court held that the primary justification for detaining defendants who are incompetent to stand trial is to provide them with relevant treatment. Unfortunately, the majority of forensic facilities place more emphasis on treating mental disability than on the specific symptoms that legally define incompetence to stand trial. Since this appears to be inconsistent withJackson, a study was conducted to test whether a treatment that deals with the specific symptoms of incompetence to stand trial would be more effective. As predicted, 21 patients who received such treatment showed significantly more improvement on an assessment instrument than 20 patients who received the more common form of treatment. In addition, more patients in the experimental treatment group than in the standard treatment group were able to be recommended to the court as competent. Implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, B. F. (1971).The psychology experiment. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1970).Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D. L. (1985). Treatment planning for the patient who is incompetent to stand trial.Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 36, 268–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwork, A. (Ed.). (1984). Psycholegal assessment, diagnosis and testimony [Special issue].Law and Human Behavior, 8 (3/4).

  • Finn, R. H. (1970). A note on estimating the reliability of categorical data.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 71–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feguer v. United States, 302 F. 2nd 214 (8th Cir., 1962).

  • Geller, J. L., & Lister, M. D. (1978). The process of criminal commitment for pretrial psychiatric examination: An evaluation.American Journal of Psychiatry, 135(1), 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gobert, J. J. (1973). Competency to stand trial: A pre and post Jackson analysis.Tennessee Law Review, 40, 659–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (1986).Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessment and instruments. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golding, S. L., Roesch, R., & Schreiber, J. (1984). Assessment and conceptualization of competency to stand trial: Preliminary data on the Interdisciplinary Fitness Interview.Law and Human Behavior, 8(3/4), 321–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, P. S., & Larson, R. S. (1978). News camera in the courtroom duringState v. Solorzano: End of Estes mandate?Southwestern University Law Review, 10, 2001–2067.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins v. McGrath, 98 F. Supp. 670 (W.D. Mo., 1951).

  • Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 (1972).

  • McGarry, A. L. (1965). Competency for trial and due process via the state hospital.American Journal of Psychiatry, 122, 623–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarry, A. L., Lelos, D., & Lipsitt, P. D. (1973).Competency to stand trial and mental illness. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, N. H., Hull, G. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbenner, C., & Bent, D. H. (1983).SPSS User's Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekala, R. J., Siegel, J. M., & Farrar, D. M. (1985). The problem-solving support group: Structured group with psychiatric inpatients.International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 35(3), 391–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pendleton, L. (1980). Treatment of persons found incompetent to stand trial.American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 1098–1100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt, J., Siegel, J. M., & Spivack, G. (1975). Do psychiatric patients and normals see the same solutions as effective in solving interpersonal problems?Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roesch, R., & Golding, S. L. (1980).Competency to stand trial. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, H. J. (1979).Beating a rap?: Defendants found incompetent to stand trial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swisher v. United States, 237 F. Supp. 291 (W.D. Mo., 1965).

  • United States v. Adams, 297 F. Supp. 596 (S.D. N.Y., 1969).

  • Winick, B. J. (1983). Incompetency to stand trial. In J. Monohan & H. J. Steadman (Eds.),Mentally disordered offenders: Vol. 6, Perspectives in law and psychology (pp. 3–38). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalom, I. (1983).Inpatient group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Law-Psychology Graduate Program, Institute for Graduate Clinical Psychology, Widener Univesity, 19013, Chester, Pennsylvania

    Amiram Elwork

  2. Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania

    Alex M. Siegel

Authors
  1. Alex M. Siegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amiram Elwork
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

We are grateful to the numerous students and colleagues whose assistance and suggestions made it possible to carry out this project.

About this article

Cite this article

Siegel, A.M., Elwork, A. Treating incompetence to stand trial. Law Hum Behav 14, 57–65 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055789

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055789

Keywords

Search

Navigation