Multiple Personality and Channeling

Rogers, Dominique

doi:10.29046/jjp.009.1.001

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to understand the complexities of DID and its relationship with law, one should start the examination by starting from its history ( Table 1 ). The first encounter with DID has taken its place in 1815, when a patient, Mary Reynolds, who, according to Rayna L. Rogers, “might sleep eighteen hours a day and then awaken with large discrepancies in her memory, penmanship and disposition” ( Rogers, 1991 ). The first case of DID that has attracted significant public attention was that of Chris Sizemore, a story of a female patient diagnosed with DID, presented in 1954 by Thigpen and Cleckley.…”

Section: Dissociative Identity Disorder In the Courtroommentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociative Identity Disorder and the Law: Guilty or Not Guilty?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is a dissociative disorder that gained a significant rise in the past few decades. There has been less than 50 DID cases recorded between 1922 and 1972, while 20,000 cases are recorded by 1990. Therefore, it becomes of great significant to assess the various concepts related to DID to further understand the disorder. The current review has a goal of understanding whether an individual suffering from DID is legally responsible for the committed crime, and whether or not he or she can be considered competent to stand trial. These two questions are to be raised in understanding DID, by first shedding a light on the nature of the disorder and second by examining the past legal case examples. Despite the very nature of the disorder is characterized by dissociative amnesia and the fact that the host personality may have limited or no contact with the alters, there is no consensus within the legal system whether the DID patients should be responsible for their actions. Further to that, courts generally deny the insanity claims for DID suffering patients. In conclusion, more studies in the field are suggested to incorporate primary data into research, as the extensive reliance on secondary data forces us to believe the conclusions that were previously made, and no opportunity to verify those conclusions is present.

show abstract

Section: Dissociative Identity Disorder In the Courtroommentioning

confidence: 99%