| The purpose of this study was to critically examine several contemporary controversies at the forefront of the law-psychology interface. This critical examination consisted of a conceptual challenge to prevailing efforts by both legal and psychiatric communities in light of the recent insights posed by the emerging “new science” of chaos theory. Topics explored include: (1) the meaning of mental illness, (2) defining and predicting dangerousness, (3) involuntary civil confinement, and (4) the right to refuse treatment. In exploring each of these issues, this study considered: (1) the prevailing legal approach, (2) the prevailing psychological/psychiatric approach, (3) the limitations of both legal and psychiatric approaches, and (4) what chaos theory can potentially contribute toward our understanding of the issue. Following the analysis of the four controversies, an in-depth case study was included to add “real life” relevance or, more accurately, to show how chaos theory might be applicable to actual cases involving law and psychology. The case study explored each of the four controversies and what chaos theory might tell us about these issues as they apply to this particular case. Finally, the study concludes by reviewing the major points of each chapter and discussing the implications of these points for the pursuit of justice. |
