MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ijlp.2018.02.009

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of law and psychiatry · 2018

Pyromania in court: Legal insanity versus culpability in Western Europe and the Netherlands (1800-1950).

Dalhuisen Lydia

Историческая статьяСтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

This article provides an overview of medico-legal views concerning pathological firesetting in Western Europe and the Netherlands in the period 1800-1950. This article aims to answer the question how changing views on firesetting as either a culpable act or an excusable expression of pathology have influenced the actual court decisions over time. The focus will be on the notion of pyromania and its implications on criminal responsibility and relevant developments concerning pathological firesetting are placed in a judicial context. In particular, the legal effects of changing views on firesetting as either pathological or punishable are discussed and illustrated by relevant Dutch court cases. Results show a pendulum movement that can be linked to changing medico-legal views. In the first half of the nineteenth century pyromania flourished and the pathology of firesetters was emphasized, leading to a focus on treatment instead of punishment. In the second half of that century the diagnosis of pyromania was questioned and focus shifted to the punishability of firesetters. In the first half of the twentieth century the pendulum seemed to stabilize with (partially) insane firesetters oftentimes receiving punishment as well as treatment.

Для цитирования: Dalhuisen Lydia. Pyromania in court: Legal insanity versus culpability in Western Europe and the Netherlands (1800-1950).. International journal of law and psychiatry. 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2018.02.009.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.