Kahler v. Kansas: Why SCOTUS Needs Descriptive Psychology

Holt, P. / Published 2020 / Presentation

Video A video of this presentation is not available.
Presenter Paula Holt, J.D. M.B.A., M.S.
Date October 3, 2020
Abstract In the United States, if defendants successfully assert the insanity defense, they are not held criminally liable for their actions. However, there are five different standards by which insanity is defined and evaluated, differing in application from state to state. Because this raises Constitutional concerns,the concept of insanity found its way before the U.S.Supreme Court this past year. I will review and analyze the Court’s decision using resources from Descriptive Psychology. My analysis shows that Descriptive Psychology offers an effective and comprehensive approach to evaluating persons asserting the insanity defense.
1. Kahler v. Kansas, 589 U.S._ (2020). 2. Ossorio, P.G. (2013). Seminar on Clinical Topics: Collected Works of Peter G. Ossorio. Descriptive Psychology Press. Volume VII. Ann Arbor, Ml. 3.Littman, Jane (2010) Guilty or not? A Descriptive Psychology Analysis. In K. E. Davis, W. Schwartz, & F. S. A. Lubuguin (Eds.), Advances in Descriptive Psychology, Vol. 9 (pp. 87- 112). Ann Arbor, Ml: Descriptive Psychology Press. 4. Littman, Jane (2010) Elucidating actus reus and mens rea: A Descriptive Psychology Perspective. In K. E. Davis, W. Schwartz, & F. S. A. Lubuguin (Eds.), Advances in Descriptive Psychology. Vol. 9 (pp. 409-430). Ann Arbor, Ml: Descriptive Psychology Press. 5. Feuerstein, Seth, Frank Fortunati, Charles A. Morgan, Vladmir Coric, Humberto Temporini, and Steven Southwick (2005) The Insanity Defense. Psychiatry. Vol. 2(9) (pp.24- 25). 6. American Psychology Association (2019), Amie Curiae in Support of Petitioner, Kahler v. Kansas, citing AAPL Practice Guideline for Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation of Defendants Raising the Insanity Defense, J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry & L., 42, S3 (2014 Supp.).