IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxjlsj/v44y2024i4p832-859..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Insanity, Disability and Responsibility: Rethinking Autonomy to Challenge Structural Inequality

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Richards

Abstract

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) operates as a lens of analysis to show that the insanity doctrine and its dispositions discriminate against the category of people with mental disabilities to whom the defence applies. However, while identifying the discrimination perpetuated by the insanity doctrine, this article argues that the CRPD Committee has failed to uncover the ultimate source of disadvantage of which the doctrine is merely symptomatic. Instead, it is argued that the criminal justice system entrenches a notion of ‘capacity-responsibility’ which situates the mentally disabled defendant as the ‘other’. In an attempt to challenge this embedded structural injustice, the article thus calls on the CRPD Committee for a more holistic application of the CRPD, to provide the tools to challenge that will move towards greater equality for people with mental disabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Richards, 2024. "Insanity, Disability and Responsibility: Rethinking Autonomy to Challenge Structural Inequality," Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 832-859.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxjlsj:v:44:y:2024:i:4:p:832-859.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ojls/gqae020
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxjlsj:v:44:y:2024:i:4:p:832-859.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ojls .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.