Accused offenders considered to be partially responsible for their actions under forensic psychiatric assessment in Serbsky Centre in 1996-2005.

Psychopathological, follow up.

Diminished responsibility was introduced into the Russian legislation ten years ago only. The current experience demonstrates its active assimilation. Besides that, there is a distinctive specificity of its use determined by peculiarities of the object of assessment, i.e. by non-psychotic level of disorder and therefore not clearly apparent in evaluation. It became clear that in many cases all involved persons including the offender are not interested in this legal norm equally. It is a good possibility for officials (experts, judges, barristers) to take into consideration during investigation every important issue of legal case (psychological abnormality first of all). The advantage of being partially responsible for offenders is not so evident. Moreover according the follow up results this fact can be the discrediting information for a prisoner. The label of mental illness is well known obstacle and especially in custody where human values are rather specific and distorted.

In situation when a forensic psychiatrist realizes probability of labeling the person due making his own decision of partially responsible one more specific problem can arises for him - is it proved from ethical point of view to make such of decision or not? It can influence negatively the expert's professional activity in some cases.