NCJ Number
117107
Date Published
1987
Length
154 pages
Annotation
Reasons for sexual discrepancy in the use of psychiatric versus penal measures by English courts are analyzed, with both verdicts and sentencing considered.
Abstract
The author contends that what appears abstractly as official statistics or social trends associated with female offenders can be analyzed in terms of the material production of social decisions. Neither medical nor judicial professionals are free to make any decision on a whim; they are constrained by impersonal regularities of the criminal process. A detailed examination of male and female cases is presented, based on official court files, court proceedings, personal case observations, and interviews with various professionals. Of 129 cases considered in depth, there were 25 male and 24 female homicide cases, 11 male homicide cases involving domestic murders, and 33 male and 36 female cases referred for psychiatric assessment. The latter group committed theft and burglary, assault, criminal damage, and arson offenses. It is concluded that sexual discrepancy is related to interaction between medical and legal internal structures. One structure regulates the practical involvement of psychiatry in criminal justice. The other structure is a set of premises and expectations invoked to assess and judge offenders. These involve particular models of subjectivity, mentality, and human nature that inevitably affect offenders' behavior and circumstances. Observable sexual discrepancy can be analytically understood when viewed in terms of both structures. Appendixes contain statistics on psychiatric disposals, information on sample cases, and interviews with professionals. 118 references, 2 tables, 3 figures.