The concept of pathological intoxication and its successor term, alcohol idiosyncratic reaction, has been one of ambiguity and professional disagreement. The history of such an entity reveals contradictions and varying usage—particularly in regard to the amount of alcohol required. Some feel that the current classification system is broad enough to include such reactions without the use of such terms. Laboratory and electroencephalographic findings are not diagnostic. The author suggests that if the concept is to be retained, psychiatrists utilize where possible the term “alcohol idiosyncratic reaction” in accord with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) III guidelines, particularly in view of the medicolegal implications discussed in Part II, which follows as a separate paper.
The tradition of the law has long frowned on criminal behavior performed in association with alcohol intake; courts have been most hesitant to provide any exculpation for drug and alcohol intake. The hostility of courts to a defense of intoxication is shown in State v. Noel [1].
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.