The Appearance in Court of Irresponsable Mentally Ill Persons

Abstract

In France, the practices concerning irresponsible mentally ill persons (relevant to article 122-1 paragraph 1),
have noticeably changed in the last few years. At the heart of these changes, we can find the proposition of a specific
and systematic appearance in court, in the presence of the patient, which occurred in 2003 during the Perben
project. Ever since, it has been the subject of constant discussion notably involving a heated national debate between
psychiatrists, judges and associations. The author focuses on two aspects of this subject: The first being how and
why judges, psychiatrists and society as a whole have been incited to question an old and stable presupposition
dating from the XIXth century consisting of prohibiting the irresponsible mentally ill person from the proceedings.
The second was to know if these proceedings led to the mentally ill person being treated or if it answered other
imperatives. For this end, the author compiled a bibliography of main writers on this subject, then carried out a
semi-directive questionnaire of 10 local actors (psychiatric experts, judges and psychologists from associations).
The results are presented and discussed. They show that this is a topic of interest for local actors in the field. Their
representation of the mentally ill person, varing over his transgressions, reflects the evolution of what has been
suggested to him. At the root of this questioning, there is a complex framework/plot of changes of the place of man
in society, of the way of viewing life risks, but also of new social values. For the psychiatrists interviewed, the
therapeutic interest of the mentally ill person seems more in discussion than pragmatic. It is rather a “symbolic”
attempt at social reassurance. These results also question the role of the psychiatrist towards the patient and the
message that he wishes to convey