Procedural justice in mental health court: an investigation of the relation of perception of procedural justice to non-adherence and termination

Mental health courts (MHCs) operate on the principles of procedural justice (PJ). PJ highlights the importance of process over outcomes in encounters with authority. Subjective perceptions of having voice, being heard by decision-makers, and being treated with respect and concern by figures of authority are influential in assessment of fairness and in cooperation with decisions, regardless of favorability of the outcome. In this paper, we investigate MHC participant perception of PJ in interactions with MHC staff and the association between perceptions and recidivism (i.e. time in jail, new arrests, and probation violations), treatment adherence, and MHC termination. Participants from two MHC programs (n?=?80) took part in this study. Results suggest that perception of PJ during interactions with the entire MHC team is significantly associated with program termination, but not with participant behaviors during MHC. Implications for MHC practitioners and researchers are discussed.     

Psychiatrists,criminals, and the law: Forensic psychiatry in Switzerland 1850–1950

Between 1880 and 1950, Swiss psychiatrists established themselves as experts in criminal courts. In this period, the judicial authorities required psychiatric testimonies in a rising number of cases. As a result, more offenders than ever before were declared mentally deficient and, eventually, sent to psychiatric asylums. Psychiatrists also enhanced their authority as experts at the political level. From the very beginning, they got involved in the preparatory works for a nationwide criminal code. In this article, I argue that these trends toward medicalization of crime were due to incremental processes, rather than spectacular institutional changes. In fact, Swiss psychiatrists gained recognition as experts due to their daily interactions with judges, public prosecutors, and legal counsels. At the same time, the spread of medical expertise had serious repercussions on psychiatric institutions. From 1942 onwards, asylums had to deal with a growing number of “criminal psychopaths,” which affected ward discipline and put psychiatry's therapeutic efficiency into question. The defensive way in which Swiss psychiatrists reacted to this predicament was crucial to the further development of forensic psychiatry. For the most part, it accounts for the subdiscipline's remarkable lack of specialization until the 1990s.     

医责险承保方能否成为仲裁第三人

采用仲裁模式处理矛盾突出又没有太多经济效益的医患纠纷初期,必须要有当地政府的参与并在财力上对仲裁机构予以支持,但长久如此既不利于仲裁模式处理医患纠纷的推广,也不利于仲裁的公正性及仲裁员回避制度的有效落实。如何不依靠政府的财政支持,通过裁决纠纷本身获得合理的报酬维持运行是亟待破解的难题。从制度设计层面看,医患纠纷仲裁模式若能与正在推行的医疗损害责任保险制度进行有效的整合,可能是解决仲裁长期运转费用的一个重要途径。但这种审理与理赔模式的整合,实际上涉及到医患纠纷仲裁是否存在第三人、承保方能否成为仲裁第三人的问题。本文以深圳市医患纠纷仲裁为切入点,对上述问题进行探讨。     

强制医疗程序的实施与反思

＂强制医疗程序＂的＂社会防卫功能＂,不仅受到限制刑事责任能力精神病人和接受过治疗精神病人社会危害性的抑制,还会因＂被精神病＂现象而打折扣。破解此困境需从三方面入手：一是参照《精神卫生法》,将涉嫌犯罪的限制刑事责任能力精神病人,纳入＂非自愿性住院治疗＂范围;二是增加精神病治疗资源投入,强化＂强制医疗＂适用与解除的风险防范意识;三是堵塞《精神卫生法》中＂非自愿性住院治疗＂的漏洞,防止其成为＂被精神病＂新生代的寄生区。     

犯罪客体: 曲解、质疑与理性解读———兼论正当事由的体系性定位简

通说将犯罪客体与民事、经济、行政等法律所保护的社会关系严格区分,并将之限定为刑法分则规定的社会关系的整体,是不可取的。否定犯罪客体在犯罪认定中的作用,缺乏说服力。以法益等替代犯罪客体中的社会关系,并不可取。犯罪客体具有事实判断与价值评价双重功能。法律关系是犯罪客体的重要内容。正当事由符合特定法律关系,没有侵犯犯罪客体,不能认定为犯罪。     

过失相抵与无过错责任简

过失相抵是损害赔偿法中的一项基本规则,适用于所有的损害赔偿之债。在适用无过错责任的侵权行为中,除非法律另有规定,可以适用过失相抵,这是法律之公平精神与自己责任原则的要求。在可以适用过失相抵规则的无过错责任中,对该规则的适用也应有一定的限制。首先,只有当受害人对损害的发生或扩大有重大过失时,才能适用过失相抵,减轻侵权人的赔偿责任。其次,如果受害人是不完全民事行为能力人,无论是受害人本人还是其监护人对于损害的发生或扩大有过错,对侵权人赔偿责任的减轻都不得低于全部损失的一定比例。     

类型学的犯罪故意概念之提倡——对德国刑法学故意学说争议的反思

百余年来德国刑法学在故意概念问题上发展出意志要素无用论、意志要素必要论和间接故意与有认识过失合一论三种基本主张的对立,以及十余种标记鲜明的理论学说。学说争议的出发点是为存在构造上具有区别的不同心理现象配置不同的责任,争议焦点在于意志要素无用和有用、行为意志和结果意志、客观危险和主观危险的对立。各种学说部分成功又部分失败的努力,以及彼此之间描述性而非实质性的区别都表明,故意界定的理论发展方向应由实体法视角转向程序法视角,由概念思维转向类型思维。在观念分界的意义上,故意是做成可能侵害法益的意志决定;在事实认定的意义上,提倡建构类型学的故意概念,通过对能够反映认识和意志强度的待证事实的解释性推论,来推断案件事实是否在整体上"充足"故意的类型。     

从罪刑均衡到罪责刑相适应——兼论刑法中“人”的消隐与凸显

刑法理论发展史上,经由刑事古典学派与刑事实证学派的对立纷争,罪刑关系经历了从罪刑均衡到"人"刑对应的演绎脉络。我国当代刑法理论确定罪责刑相适应原则,藉由刑事责任论的建构和充实,较为完美地实现了罪刑关系范畴中行为考察和行为人评价的统一。梳理从罪刑均衡到罪责刑相适应的发展历程,可以看出,伴随刑法理论的发展,犯罪人逐渐实现从消隐到凸显的地位变迁。当代刑法学的发展方向,应是日益重视行为人主体地位的确立和人格特征的评价。以此为视角,我国刑法学应从理论上更加重视主观因素和行为人因素的植入,在实践中更加关注行为人人身危险性的评价和犯罪恶性的改造。     

行政证据与刑事证据衔接机制研究——以新《刑事诉讼法》第52条第2款为分析重点

2012年修正后的《刑事诉讼法》第52条第2款建立了行政证据与刑事证据的衔接机制。在肯定这一机制建立的正当性的同时,有必要对"可以作为证据使用"的内涵、行政证据与刑事证据衔接的范围、有权移交行政证据的主体等基本问题予以分析和阐释。行政证据与刑事证据的衔接可能造成司法实践操作的混乱,导致侦查活动前置,架空非法证据排除规则,侵犯犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的合法权利。为此,应当完善相关法律规则,划清侦查机关与其他行政机关的职能界限,严格行政证据的审查标准,加强对辩护方权利的保护。     

劳教废止后对违法犯罪行为惩治和矫正的法律导向——基于刑法宽容理念的善后与衔接

未经法律授权即可对公民实施包括限制人身自由在内的强制措施,这是劳教制度最大的制度软肋,也是致其最终被废止的根本原因。劳教制度废止后的制度设计应当引以为戒,尽量避免"劳教制度已死,劳教式管理模式还在"的尴尬局面。遵循理念先导、制度跟进的规律,未来的制度设计必先契合法治理念。而于刑事法治理念而言,不遵循刑法宽容理念的制度设计必定依然难逃窠臼。故而在改革中除了要关注基本制度的构建和刑事政策的贯彻之外,更为重要的还在于刑法宽容理念的培养和倡导。