Defendants with intellectual disability and autism spectrum conditions: the perspective of clinicians working across three jurisdictions

Abstract

The treatment of vulnerable defendants by criminal justice systems or correctional systems varies within and between countries. The purpose of this paper is to examine three legal jurisdictions – New South Wales in Australia; Norway; England and Wales – to understand the extent of variation in practice within the court systems for defendants with intellectual disabilities (ID) and/or autism spectrum conditions (ASC). Two of the jurisdictions had a process for screening in place, either in police custody or at court, but this was not universally implemented across each jurisdiction. All three jurisdictions had a process for supporting vulnerable defendants through the legal system. Across the three jurisdictions, there was variation in disposal options from a mandatory care setting to hospital treatment to a custodial sentence for serious offences. This variation requires further international exploration to ensure the rights of defendants with ID or ASC are understood and safeguarded.

La figura de facilitación de acceso a la justicia. Comparación internacional de un reto formativo

“…El nombre mismo hace alusión a menores (barna significa "los niños"), aunque en ocasiones se haya utilizado con personas con discapacidad intelectual y del desarrollo. Se acude a ellos mayoritariamente en casos de personas que denuncian, frente a los acusados, pero su admisión depende de los juzgados en función de los informes diagnósticos previos de la persona (las personas con discapacidad intelectual severa no se consideran con responsabilidad criminal, pese a que puedan adoptarse medidas específicas por sus actos - McCarthy et al, 2021-). El Ministerio de Asuntos Sociales e Infancia financia este profesional.…”

Suspected feigning of autism in adults: a clinician survey, indications and proposed guidelines

“…Depending on the specific circumstances and age of the individual, receiving an autism diagnosis may result in special considerations or allow access to specialist services. Indeed, receiving an autism diagnosis may be viewed as a potential mitigating factor during any criminal proceedings (Cooper and Allely, 2017; McCarthy et al , 2021), allow possible educational and occupational entitlements or perhaps even result in being treated more sympathetically by others, especially so compared to having a personality disorder (Carthy and Murphy, 2021). For many individuals, the accurate diagnosis of autism can therefore be crucial not only for an individual’s own peace of mind and understanding, but also for being formally recognised as having autism by services influential in determining outcomes such as employers, social services or the criminal justice system (Freckelton, 2021; Wolf, 2021).…”