Borderline Personality Disorder in the Courtroom

Abstract

The insanity defense has been criticized with consequences for individuals with real mental illness. In the United States, several states have redefined the insanity defense by excluding antisocial personality disorder from consideration for the not guilty by reason of insanity plea. Four states have eliminated the insanity defense completely. The purpose of this article is to analyze the diagnosis of borderline personality disorder, its relevance in the courtroom setting, and how this speaks to the approach of the insanity defense in general. The history of the insanity defense, impulsive nature of borderline personality disorder, and the reasons that make personality disorders controversial are reviewed. The impulsive nature, and the association to childhood trauma, dissociation, and frontolimbic abnormalities support the continued protection of borderline personality disorder under the insanity defense. Knowledge of these facts will assist the forensic psychiatrist in effectively educating the courtroom about borderline personality disorder.

Key words:

• borderline personality disorder
• cortico-limbic model
• dissociation
• forensic psychiatry
• insanity defense
• splitting
• suicide

Ethical standards

Declaration of conflicts of interest

Jin S. Lee has declared no conflicts of interest

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the author.