ebooks logo journals logo reference works logo abstract databases logo
bullet  SIGN IN Register | Why Register? | Got a Voucher? alerts   marked lists   shopping cart 

informaworld

HOME   |   SEARCH   |   BROWSE
    Issues List       Latest Issue       Forthcoming Articles       Volume 15 Issue 4       Subscribe       Article       References       Related articles      
<< firstfirst   < prevprev   Table of contentstoc   next >next   last >>last
Publisher Logo Publication Cover
Search within this journal

Identity, control and responsibility: the case of Dissociative Identity Disorder 

Authors: Jeanette Kennett; Steve Matthews
DOI: 10.1080/0951508021000042???
Publication Frequency: 6 issues per year
Published in: journal Philosophical Psychology, Volume 15, Issue 4 December 2002 , pages 509 - 526
Number of References: 24
Formats available: PDF (English)
Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions
View Article: View Article (PDF) View Article (PDF)


Abstract

Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) (formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder) is a condition in which a person appears to possess more than one personality, and sometimes very many. Some recent criminal cases involving defendants with DID have resulted in "not guilty" verdicts, though the defense is not always successful in this regard. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Stephen Behnke have argued that we should excuse DID sufferers from responsibility, only if at the time of the act the person was insane (typically delusional); otherwise the presumption should be that persons with DID are indeed responsible for their actions. We find their interpretation of DID and of the way in which the requirements for criminal insanity relate to this condition worrying and likely to result in injustice to DID sufferers. Our thesis is that persons with DID cannot be responsible for their actions if the usual features of the condition are present. A person with DID is a single person in the grip of a very serious mental disorder. By focusing on the features of DID which have, as we argue, the effect of deluding the patient, we try to show that such a person is unable to fulfill the ordinary conditions of responsible agency (namely, autonomy and self-control).
view references (24)
Bookmark with:
  • CiteULike
  • Del.icio.us
  • BibSonomy
  • Connotea
  • More bookmarks
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Accessibility | RSS
FAQs in: English . Français . Español . 中文(简体和繁體)
© 2009 Informa plc