Recently I haven’t made that many updates, not blog posts or updates to the supplements. There’s a reason for this; term has started. This means that I’m about to start my post-graduate research project into law and forensic psychiatry, and their joint venture of defining and legitimating sanity pleas in the courtroom.
As you might have heard, back in July 2011 there was a terrorist attack gone mass murder gone whatever (depends on how you define it I guess), here in Norway. In short, this case brought into light the problematic definition and laws concerning sanity and responsibility for ones actions here in Norway, we have some odd laws compared to other Scandinavian countries – and other European and north American countries (i.e. the “West”). I guess one could reduce it to semantics, but then one can say that Law is all about semantics through interpretation of laws. There’s a lot more to it than that of course, but in this case it is partly the case – and of course the sociological issue of what repercussions this can have on the individual, but also society in general.
So this year I’m delving into this issue from a sociological perspective, analysing both forensic psychiatry (and psychiatry and psychology in general) and the judicial system and practice, as expert systems. The point of this post is only to – in a long winded way – explain why posts (and updates to the supplements) will appear only sporadically.