Article link: Andrea Yates, drowned 5 childrenhttp://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/andrea_yates/2.htm1. What were the differences in the media portrayal and the information we learned in this unitThe media traditionally like to simplify issues. In the Yates Murder case the central question of Katherine Ramsland is whether or not Yates was Ill or Evil. He article is not an in depth exploration of the dynamics of the case, instead it focuses on if she Andrea was in capacity of her faculties (Ramsland , 2014). If she did not, then she was ill, but if she was, then she was evil. But Psychopathy is a spectrum disease and it can occur in conjunction with other illnesses. It appears that depression may have played a part, but depression in an person withy psychopathy can be exceptionally dangerous. 3. If you were not able to access this material, based on the information in this unit, what would be the major assessment questions at issuePsychopathy is a difficult case for courts to rule on. Because people with the condition do not feel human emotion like a regular human being, regular human beings have trouble understanding what it could be like for someone who does not have empathy or compassion. In one sense, a person with psychopathy is lives is a solipsist world where they are really only aware of their own consciousness. Andrea Yates certainly is a person who should not be living within a normal society because she killed her kids. Even if she is conclusively found to have psychopathy, there still might be a compelling case to put her in prison not a mental-health facility, since there is no cure for psychopathy.Tarasoff CaseAdditional Resource: http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/torts/torts-keyed-to-dobbs/the-duty-to-protect-from-third-persons/tarasoff-v-regents-of-university-of-california/2/
1. What would be minimally required for an appropriate assessment today in reference to the above case?The court would need to see the case files of from Mr. Poddar’s therapist in order to determine based on this evidence if the Dr. had enough information to assume that there was enough information for there to be a reasonable assumption that Ms. Tarasoff was in harm’s way.
2. What specific information/data would be minimally acceptable for a thorough assessment in this case?Dr. Moore’s case files. 3. What would an evaluator need to know regarding issues about Mr. Poddar’s competence to stand trial for this offense?This case would be regulated by the Bloomberg law. The court would need to take the lead of mental health professionals in order to see if Mr. Poddar, at the time of the murder, had an awareness of what he was doing. This case represents a complicated branch of tort law which, concerns to moral duty of an individual to protect another individual (Casebriefs, 2014).
4. What would an evaluator need to know regarding issues about Mr. Poddar’s sanity/insanity at the time of the offense?An evaluator would need to know about what the “special relationship” was between. The therapist and the suspect, in this case between Dr. Moore and Tarasoff in order to understand if he had a moral duty to warn the victim. As a general rule, “when a hospital has notice or knowledge of facts from which it might reasonably be concluded that a patient would be likely to harm himself or others unless preclusive measures were taken, then the hospital must use reasonable care in the circumstances to prevent such harm” (Casebriefs, 2014).
References
Ramsland, Katherine. "Andrea Yates: Ill or Evil?" Crime LIbrary. Web. 19 Nov. 2014. <http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/andrea_yates/2.htm>.
"Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California | Casebriefs." Casebriefs. Web. 19 Nov. 2014. <http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/torts/torts-keyed-to-dobbs/the-duty-to-protect-from-third-persons/tarasoff-v-regents-of-university-of-california/2/>.
