Psychiatric care or social defense?: The origins of a controversy over the responsibility of the mentally ill in French forensic psychiatry

While some countries like Belgium chose a penal system clearly inspired by social-defense theories for mentally disturbed criminals, the French law hasnʹt been consistent and varies from the enlightened classical law and social-defense law. Indeed paragraph 1 of article 122-1 states that people whose discernment or control is abolished by a psychiatric disorder are non-responsible respecting the classical logic of law. On the other hand, Paragraph 2 of Article 122-1 allows the mentally ill to be judged responsible whereas no institution exists to take care about them. Then the system of psychiatric care in prisons present as a solution for professionals wishing to promote a system where people are punished and socially rehabilitated. Thus these forensic psychiatrists donʹt refer to paragraph 1 of article 122-1 and even people presenting serious mental disorders are considered responsible. Moreover, if a controversy has always existed between psychiatrists who argue a large conception of mental irresponsibility and professionals who defend the right to punish and to conclude that responsibility even for mentally disturbed criminals, the controversy becomes more important in French forensic psychiatry after the Second World War. If until the 1970s the practice of imposing responsibility for mentally ill individuals shows itself as a humanism, it occurs more within a security perspective today.