Comparative study of forensic psychiatric system between China and America

Laws and regulations about the forensic psychiatric systems in China and America were compared, and suggestions for improving the forensic psychiatric system of China were provided. There are many differences regarding the role of the forensic psychiatrist, the initiation of the assessment and the admission of expert opinion because of elements in the legal systems in China and America. The Chinese system has the advantages of objectivity, cost saving and high efficiency; but it has deficiencies in procedural justice and the admission of expert opinion. China can persist with the current system while taking measures to give more rights to the litigants to participate in their assessment, and while improving the quality and utility of the expert opinion; however, this review article will compare broadly the two systems without addressing human rights issues or procedural justice issues, nor will it presume to address the entirety of Chinese systems. In addition, China is developing its legal system for dealing with the mentally ill defendant in situations involving the criminal justice system and civil commitment. Although China enacted new laws regarding the mandatory treatment for the mentally ill, both in criminal and civil systems, there remain many aspects to be improved, including but not limited to a system of review of the decision to detain a patient on psychiatric grounds, and the need for provisions in the laws preventing indefinite detention. From this viewpoint, America's laws and regulations are instructive for us, in matters such as the method of dealing with the mentally ill defendant who is “incompetent to stand trial”, “not guilty only by reason of insanity” or “guilty but mentally ill”. The conditional release of the committed mentally ill person and the special programs in the forensic security hospital are all worthy of study by China in order to manage the mentally ill offender and to reduce the recidivism rate.