Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Bad Science Makes Bad Law: How Deference Afforded to Psychiatry Undermines Civil Liberties

Samantha Godwin,"Bad Science Makes Bad Law: How the Deference Afforded to Psychiatry Undermines Civil Libterties," 10 Seattle J. for Soc. Just. 647 (2012).

63 Pages Posted: 19 Apr 2011 Last revised: 6 Feb 2014

Samantha Godwin

Yale University - Law School; University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law

Date Written: April 17, 2011

Abstract

Courts and lawmakers trust psychiatric expertise when making judicial and public policy decisions concerning mental health, but is this trust well placed? This paper adopts a philosophy of science approach informed by medical research to evaluating the validity of psychiatric classification. This provides the basis for an interdisciplinary critical analysis of civil commitment law and use of psychiatric expert witnesses in light of legal evidence standards. This analysis demonstrates that involuntary civil commitment as it now stands is incompatible with broader due process and civil rights concerns and affords an unjustifiable evidentiary status to psychiatric diagnosis.

Keywords: psychiatry, law, philosophy of science, evidence, law and psychiatry, law and philosophy, civil commitment, involuntary commitment, civil rights, due process

Suggested Citation

Godwin, Samantha, Bad Science Makes Bad Law: How Deference Afforded to Psychiatry Undermines Civil Liberties (April 17, 2011). Samantha Godwin,"Bad Science Makes Bad Law: How the Deference Afforded to Psychiatry Undermines Civil Libterties," 10 Seattle J. for Soc. Just. 647 (2012).. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1813384 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1813384

Samantha Godwin (Contact Author)

Yale University - Law School ( email )

P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States

University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law ( email )

10 West Road
Cambridge, CB3 9DZ
United Kingdom

Paper statistics

Downloads
173
Rank
146,780
Abstract Views
1,774