NCJ Number
145910
Journal
Journal of Forensic Sciences Volume: 38 Issue: 6 Dated: (November 1993) Pages: 1442-1459
Date Published
1993
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article reports on the first study to follow up on the disposition of the criminal charges of persons committed to a hospital for the restoration of "competency to stand trial" who refused antipsychotic medication and for whom involuntary treatment was sought.
Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court, in the recent case of Riggins v. Nevada, extended its examination of the issue of involuntary treatment with antipsychotic medication to the mentally disabled who face criminal trial. Although this was an extreme case where the defendant faced a possible death sentence, the involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication to restore "competency to stand trial" always raises distinctive medical and moral questions. This controversial issue has received little empirical investigation. The cohort of patients (n=68) examined in the current study consisted of all indicted felony offenders in New York State who were incompetent to stand trial and from whom involuntary treatment with antipsychotic medication was requested between 1986 and 1990. This retrospective report on the study focuses on the disposition of the criminal charges for such cases in a State that does not have a death penalty. The study concludes that judicial denial of involuntary treatment with antipsychotic medication is sometimes followed by convictions rather than acquittals on the pending criminal charges. Also, forced medication for restoration to "competency to stand trial" does not preclude the subsequent successful use of an insanity defense. Indicted felony offenders in New York who have been involuntarily medicated and restored to trial-competency most often face the plea negotiation process rather than criminal trial. Forced medication to restore "competency to stand trial" does not preclude the subsequent use of the plea negotiation process in ways that may favorably limit the confinement period and at times lead to immediate release. There is no evidence from this study that forced medication per se during a pretrial hospitalization worsens the outcome of pending criminal charges. Study limitations and future research on this issue are discussed. 6 tables and 59 references