Forensic Evaluation of Sexsomnia.

Sexsomnia is a non-rapid eye movement parasomnic behavior characterized by sexual activity during sleep. Recognized in the most recent editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, sexsomnia is likely to arise with increasing frequency in court as a potential explanation for sexual offending. The forensic psychiatrist has a unique role in the evaluation and management of sexsomnia. The psychosexual evaluation may elucidate the presence or absence of paraphilias and paraphilic disorders and identify any overlap between the alleged sexsomnic behavior and paraphilic interest. In addition, forensic psychiatrists may assess for malingered sexsomnia, provide an opinion regarding criminal responsibility, or evaluate the risk for committing future sexual offenses. Forensic psychiatrists should therefore understand basic information regarding the disorder, as well as how to conduct a psychosexual evaluation effectively in cases of alleged sexsomnia. This article describes the various considerations involved in the forensic evaluation of sexsomnia.

Voting by People with Mental Illness.

While voting laws trend toward universal suffrage, there are still some who encounter barriers in exercising the right to vote. Citizens with mental illness or cognitive and emotional impairments are especially vulnerable to exclusion from the political process, contributing to disenfranchisement. Facilitating the process for hospitalized patients to vote can increase their agency and amplify their voices and concerns. Through exercising their civic responsibility, psychiatric patients can have a hand in shaping a community in which they feel valued. In this article we will review the literature about voting, the current voting laws, and our lessons learned facilitating voting by proxy at Cambridge Hospital in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, as well as the obstacles encountered. We will also propose methods to improve implementation of voting by hospitalized psychiatric patients for upcoming elections.

Involuntary Treatment of Psychosis in Pregnancy.

When a patient with acute psychosis refuses antipsychotic medication despite a clear need for treatment, involuntary medication is often considered. When the patient is both pregnant and acutely unwell, an additional layer of analysis enters the picture. This analysis then also includes the health of the mother and fetus, rights of the mother and fetus, and whose rights take precedence when choosing treatment options in event of a conflict. Antipsychotic agents are frequently the medications prescribed as involuntary treatment. Typical and atypical antipsychotic agents are often used in both emergent and nonemergent situations during pregnancy. Despite a lack of randomized, double-blind, controlled, prospective studies in pregnancy, available data regarding the safety of antipsychotic agents in pregnancy are relatively reassuring. At the same time, the risks of untreated psychosis, for both the mother and the fetus, are not negligible. Such cases merit ethics-related and legal analyses. Forensic psychiatrists involved in such cases need to consider the patient's capacity to make medical decisions and be able to discuss the potential risks, benefits, and alternatives with patients and in court, as part of initiation of involuntary treatment.

The Transgender Bathroom Debate at the Intersection of Politics, Law, Ethics, and Science.

The debate over whether transgender individuals should be allowed to use the public restrooms (including locker rooms and changing rooms) that correspond to their currently expressed gender rather than their biological sex has been of recent interest nationally. The first state law addressing transgender access to restrooms was in North Carolina in 2016. This law prohibited transgender individuals from using the restroom that corresponded to their gender. The terms used in the bill and other legal documents caused it to be referred to as the "bathroom bill." Shortly thereafter, such bills were proposed in many states. Proponents of the bills identify the need to protect public safety by mandating that individuals use the facility that corresponds to their biological sex. Opponents describe such bills as discriminatory. The debate about these bills incorporates ethics-related, legal, and biological arguments. In this commentary, we review the history of such bills in the United States as well as the ethics-related, legal, and evidence-based arguments raised in the debate.

Commentary: women, violence, and insanity.

There is less research about homicidal women than about their male counterparts. Women are often considered the gentler sex, and their risk of perpetrating violent acts is underestimated. In attempts to understand violence by women with mental illness, female homicide offenders found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) are an important subpopulation. Understanding common factors in this subpopulation (such as psychosis with religious delusions) may help in preventing severe violence perpetrated by women with mental illness. However, as with other crimes, those with mental illness who commit homicide may often have rational, nonpsychotic motives (such as anger, jealousy, self-defense, money, or criminal intent) and would not be captured in a study of those found NGRI. Further, caution must be used when studying an NGRI population, as there are potential gender biases in findings of insanity.

Psychiatrists' knowledge about maternal filicidal thoughts.

OBJECTIVE: Child murder by mentally ill mothers is an important public health and psychiatric concern. However, the authors' clinical and forensic experience has been that psychiatrists often do not inquire about maternal thoughts of harming their children. This study sought to elucidate the perceptions of psychiatrists and psychiatric residents regarding the frequency of such thoughts, and to clarify whether they inquire specifically about maternal filicidal thoughts. Psychiatrists were expected to underestimate the prevalence maternal thoughts of harming their children. It was hypothesized that psychiatrists often do not ask their patients about these thoughts. METHODS: This study surveyed psychiatrists and psychiatric residents at 2 academic institutions. Respondents were asked whether they routinely query women about motherhood, to estimate the frequency of thoughts of child harm, and whether they inquire about filicidal thoughts in psychotic or suicidal mothers. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty surveys (67%) were returned. Most psychiatrists underestimated the frequency of depressed mothers who experienced thoughts of harming their young children. Almost one half indicated that they do not ask specifically about filicidal ideation but rather ask about general homicidal thoughts only. CONCLUSIONS: Psychiatrists should have further education about the prevalence of filicidal thoughts and more frequently inquire about them.