Middle English sanite, from the Anglo-French sanitã©, from the Latin sanitat-, sanitas health, sanity, de sanus gesund, sane n. mental illness of such a serious nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct his business due to psychosis or is prone to uncontrollable impulsive behavior. Insanity is different from low intelligence or mental retardation due to age or injury. If a complaint is filed with law enforcement, district attorney, or medical staff that a person demonstrates psychotic behavior, they may be locked up in a medical facility long enough (usually 72 hours) to be reviewed by psychiatrists who submit written reports to the local supervisor/district court/district court. It is followed by a hearing before a judge during which the person concerned is entitled to legal representation in order to determine whether he or she should be accommodated in an institution or a special institution. The person who was institutionalized at the hearing may request a court hearing to determine the reason. Especially since initial hearings are often routine and psychiatric findings are accepted by the judge. In criminal cases, a plea of “not guilty of incompetence” requires a trial on the issue of the insanity (or reason) of the accused at the time the crime is committed. In these cases, the defendant usually invokes “temporary madness” (crazy at the time, but okay now).

The traditional test of insanity in criminal matters is whether the accused knew “the difference between good and evil,” the “M`Naughten rule” of 19th-century England. ==References==Most states require more stringent tests based on psychiatric and/or psychological testimonies evaluated by a jury of laymen or a judge without psychiatric training. A criminal accused`s allegation of insanity at trial requires a separate hearing to determine whether an accused is healthy enough to understand the nature of a trial and participate in his or her own defence. If the accused is found guilty of mental illness, he is taken to a psychiatric institution and the trial takes place only when the reason arises. Sex offenders can be found healthy for all purposes, with the exception of dangerous and/or antisocial compulsive behaviors. They are usually sentenced to special institutions for sex offenders, supposedly with available counseling. However, there are often maximum penalties that relate to the nature of the crime, so probation and release can be done without healing the compulsive desire to commit sexual crimes. In criminal and psychiatric law, reason is a legal term that means that a person has a clear mind and can therefore bear legal responsibility for his or her actions.

The official legal term is compos mentis. It is usually defined in terms of the absence of madness (non compos mentis). It is not a medical term, although the opinions of medical experts are often important in making a legal decision as to whether a person is healthy or mentally ill. Nor is it the same concept as mental illness. You can act under a deep mental illness while being healthy, and you can be declared crazy even without an underlying mental illness. [8] Reason (from Latin: sāntā) refers to the solidity, rationality, and health of the human mind, as opposed to madness. A person is healthy if he is rational. In modern society, the term has become exclusively synonymous with compos mentis (Latin: compos, domination and Latin: mentis, spirit), as opposed to non compos mentis or madness, which means disturbed consciousness. A healthy mind is now considered healthy, both in its analytical – formerly called rational – and emotional aspects. [1] According to the writer G.

K. Chesterton,[2] reason implies fullness, while madness implies narrowness and rupture. Alfred Korzybski proposed a theory of reason in his general semantics. He believed that reason was related to logical thinking and understanding what was happening in the world. He imposed this term in an analogy between the map and the territory: “A map is not the territory it represents, but, if it is correct, it has a `similar structure` to the territory, which explains its usefulness.” [3] Since science is constantly trying to structurally adapt its theories to facts, that is, to improve its maps to adapt them to the territory, and thus to advance faster than any other field, he believed that the key to understanding reason would lie in the study of the methods of science (and the study of structure as revealed by science). Adopting a scientific vision and attitude of the individual`s continuous adaptation to his assumptions is the way, he said. In other words, there were “factors of reason found in the physico-mathematical methods of science.” He also pointed out that reason requires the awareness that “everything you say is a thing, it is not”[4] because not everything that is expressed through language is the reality to which it refers: language is like a map, and the map is not the territory. The territory or reality remains unspeakable, unspeakable and mysterious. Therefore, the widespread assumption that we can grasp reality through language implies some degree of madness. In-depth understanding; The reversal of insanity, (q.v.) n. in a criminal prosecution, a defense by the defendant that he/she was briefly mentally ill at the time of committing the crime and was therefore unable to know the nature of his alleged criminal act.

Temporary insanity is invoked as a defence, whether or not the accused is mentally stable at the time of trial. A difficulty in a defense of temporary insanity is the problem of evidence, since any examination by psychiatrists had to be done retrospectively, so the only evidence must be the behavior of the accused immediately before or after the fact. This is similar to the defense of the “diminished ability” to understand one`s actions, the so-called “twinkie defense,” the “excuse of abuse,” the “heat of passion,” and other claims about mental disorders that raise the problem of criminal intent based on modern psychiatry and/or sociology. However, mental confusion at the time of a sudden crime, such as a sudden attack or crime of passion, may be a valid defense or at least show a lack of intent to reduce the degree of crime. Reasonable understanding; healthy mind; Possess mental abilities capable of distinguishing good from evil in order to assume legal responsibility for one`s actions. Jur. The condition of a person who has a healthy understanding; The reversal of madness. 2.

The reason of an individual is always assumed. Legal definitions of reason have been little studied by science and medicine, as the focus was on disease. [9] It remains totally impossible to prove the reason. Moreover, as Korzybski[10] has repeatedly pointed out, insanity is prevalent to varying degrees in the general population, which includes many people considered mentally fit in medical and legal terms. In this context, Erich Fromm[11] referred to the “pathology of normality”, while David Cooper suggested that normality was against both madness and reason. [12] In The Sane Society, published in 1955, psychologist Erich Fromm suggested that not only individuals, but entire societies “may lack reason.” Fromm argued that one of the most misleading features of social life involves “consensual validation”:[6] Psychiatrist Philip S.