Beneficial Defense In keeping the insanity defense, as it stands, the benefits outweigh the problems. This defense fixes problems with the mentally insane and leads to curing more of the mentally ill. Viewing the defense as a benefit seems to fit if it helps more people than it harms, although other views have been brought against it opposing the defense. The jurisdictions that have kept the defense see it rarely and take it as a claim of innocence. The innocent people who have severe mental illness might finally have an opportunity to become viable members of society through rehabilitation. This plea may also shed light on the severity and seriousness that mental illness plays in our communities as these individuals are of great …show more content…
If truly mentally ill, being tried as harshly as a competent person would be does no good. “People have free choice to do good or ill. If they choose to do ill, they may be blamed and punished. But if they do not choose to do ill, it is morally insensitive to punish them” (Hathaway 313). If the defendant is committing the action without evil intent or purposefully choosing to , trying them for a crime does not make sense. The defendant is not going to improve or benefit society if put to death using the death penalty or thrown in jail without having full comprehension of his/her wrong doing. The ill cannot be fixed or cured without the help of a psychiatric facility which death or jail time does not allow them to receive. The insanity defense as is, is unexpectedly not successful unless it truly applies to the case. Many medical examinations and tests are done to get a conclusion. The defense cannot just be used to get out of jail or the death penalty. An insanity plea is hard to prove, so if falsely claiming insanity, it is highly unlikely of being successful. Still, some jurisdictions continue to abolish the defense. As stated by Dr. Ewing in Puschak’s video, it is crazy to plead insanity, It rarely works. Therefore if you are successful in pleading insanity, the judge and juror saw significant evidence proving mental illness in your …show more content…
Although eradicating the defense all together does not have much of a benefit, as the only positive is decreasing the amount of research and time put into proving insanity with all the test that must be done. In contrast, according to Apecsec, the first thing done in an insanity plea is a mental evaluation which psychologist facilitate and help move along quickly and get the information needed. However, in all reality any routine defense is also going to need that much research, so the perspective or opposition to the insanity defense has little to back up its reasoning. Opposers feel differently about the test as seen in an article by Hathaway, “none of the various insanity tests has met with a great deal of approval” as some feel they are insufficient