000			01708cam a2200277 4500500
005			20250121083456.0
041			_afre
042			_adc
100	1	0	_aHumbert, Sylvie _eauthor
245	0	0	_aRisk prevention: Judges and psychiatrists pursuing the same objectives
260			_c2017.
500			_a25
520			_aThe criminal irresponsibility of the mentally ill was established as early as the second century AD by the Roman emperors. Echoing Ancien Regime law, the penal code of 1810 considers that the criminal is in control of his rational faculties, and that the madman cannot be a criminal. Very quickly, the porous boundary between crime and madness became the object of specific studies, and revealed its limitations in sordid and often unmotivated judicial cases. “Criminal madness,” total unreason, swung back toward partial unreason, and abuses that grant impunity to the guilty were denounced. In the twenty-first century, confronted with risks linked to potential threat and possible re-offending, a new approach to criminal responsibility has led to the defense of society to the detriment of the individual, which some view as promoting a dehumanization of both justice and psychiatry.
690			_aevolution
690			_aPapin sisters
690			_adehumanization
690			_adangerousness
690			_arisk
690			_acriminal responsibility
690			_amentally ill
690			_acrime
690			_adiscernment
690			_ajustice
786	0		_nL'information psychiatrique | Volume 93 | 3 | 2017-03-30 | p. 185-191 | 0020-0204
856	4	1	_uhttps://shs.cairn.info/journal-l-information-psychiatrique-2017-3-page-185?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080
999			_c503251 _d503251