英语翻译AbstractWe present a case of shared psychotic disorder i

英语翻译
Abstract
We present a case of shared psychotic disorder involving three sisters who were successful in establishing an insanity defense on numerous felony charges in the South Carolina criminal court system.Two of the authors of this article were court-appointed examiners in this case.We then present a history of shared psychotic disorder,an overview of the use of this diagnosis in the defense of insanity,and a discussion of the disposition of individuals with "temporary insanity." Finally,we compare shared psychotic disorder,culturally based belief systems,and religious cults,with a focus on their common and contrasting characteristics.
In South Carolina,a case of shared psychotic disorder―in this case a folie à trois involving three biological sisters―resulted in successful insanity defenses for all three defendants.We present the case and then discuss the history of shared psychotic disorder and the use of this diagnosis as an insanity defense.In addition,the disposition of individuals with "temporary insanity," in contrast to traditional insanity acquittees,will be discussed.Finally,we will compare shared psychotic disorder with culturally based religious ideation and cults.
Criminal Responsibility Standards
The insanity defense has been around for centuries.In ancient Rome,legal codes distinguished between those who were insane (and thus not accountable for their wrongful conduct) and those who were sane (and thus held responsible for their actions).1 A basic assumption of Anglo-American law is that each person has the ability to distinguish and the freedom to choose between lawful and unlawful conduct.2 Most jurisdictions in the United States employ one of several tests to determine legal insanity:the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984 (for federal courts and all branches of the military),the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code (19 states),the M’Naghten standard (25 states),or the "product" test (one state).36 In South Carolina,a defendant cannot be held criminally responsible if "as a result of mental disease or defect,the defendant lacks the capacity to distinguish moral or legal right from moral or legal wrong or to recognize the particular act charged as morally or legally wrong."7

我们提出了一个共同的精神,涉及三姐妹谁是在建立在南卡罗来纳州刑事法院系统众多重罪罪名辩护精神错乱症成功案例.本文章的作者在这种情况下,两名法庭指定的考官.然后,我们提出一个共同的精神障碍,对这个在精神错乱辩护诊断中的应用概况,以及对与“临时精神错乱的个人处置的讨论的历史.”最后,我们比较共同的精神障碍,基于文化的信仰,宗教和邪教,同时把重点放在它们的共同特点和对比.
在南卡罗来纳州,一个共同的精神障碍的情况下,在这种情况下,疯狂à三河,涉及3种生物姐妹,导致精神失常抗辩的成功为所有3名被告.我们目前的情况,然后讨论了共同的精神病性障碍,而该作为精神错乱辩护诊断中的应用历史.此外,与“临时精神错乱”,相对于传统的精神错乱acquittees,将讨论的个人气质.最后,我们将比较共同的宗教与文化的思维能力和邪教的精神障碍.
刑事责任标准
在精神错乱辩护已经存在了几个世纪.在古罗马,法律法规区分谁是疯狂的（因而不为他们的不法行为承担责任）和那些谁是明智的（从而对他们的行为负责）0.1的英美法的基本假设是,每个人有能力辨别和选择的自由,合法和非法之间的大部分地区conduct.2在美国雇用了几个测试,以确定一个法律精神错乱：1984年的国防改革法案疯狂的联邦法院和各军兵种（ ）,美国法律研究所的模范刑法典（19国）,M'Naghten标准（25国）,或“产品”测试（一州）0.36在南卡罗来纳州,被告可以不承担刑事责任,如果“作为一种精神疾病或缺陷所致,被告没有能力区分道德或法律从道德或法律错误或承认指控为特定行为的权利在道义上和法律上是错误的.