抑郁症和躁狂症患者违法行为的犯罪学特征及对照分析

The criminological characteristics of patients with depression or mania disorders

目的探讨抑郁症和躁狂症患者的犯罪学特征,为更好地从事司法精神病学服务提供客观、科学的依据。方法收集近8年以来我室有关情感性精神障碍的司法鉴定资料,对符合纳入标准的73例案例整理、归纳后进行犯罪学特征、刑事责任能力评定的描述性统计和相关性分析,对抑郁症和双相情感障碍躁狂相的违法行为做比较分析。结果情感性精神障碍患者的犯罪学特征:作案前有动机共43例(58.90%),无动机30例(41.10%)(χ2=4.630,P=0.031)。作案前有准备45例(61.60%),没有准备28例(38.40%)(χ2=7.918,P=0.005)。作案后反侦察27例(37.00%),自杀以及其他精神异常表现46例(63.00%)(χ2=9.923,P=0.002)。刑事责任能力评定:有责任能力21例(28.80%),无责任能力18例(24.70%),部分责任能力43例(46.60%)(χ2=6.154,P=0.046)。其中抑郁症患者43例(58.90%),双相情感障碍躁狂相患者30例(41.10%)(χ2=4.630,P=0.031)。抑郁症患者在作案前有准备28例(65.10%),无准备15例(34.90%)(χ2=7.860,P=0.005),作案时间有选择28例(65.10%),没有选择15例(34.90%)(χ2=7.860,P=0.005),作案后有自杀等精神异常表现34例(79.10%),无异常反应9例(20.90%)(χ2=29.070,P=0.000)。双相障碍躁狂相患者在作案有动机20例(66.70%),无动机10例(33.30%)(χ2=6.667,P=0.001),作案时间有选择9例(30.00%),无选择21例(70.00%)(χ2=9.600,P=0.002);双相情感障碍与抑郁症患者在作案时间选择(χ2=8.718,P=0.003)、作案后表现(χ2=11.574,P=0.001)方面存在着显著差异。结论情感性精神障碍患者违法行为常常具有作案有动机、作案前有准备、案发后出现自杀和其他精神异常表现居多的特点。其中抑郁症较躁狂症多见,其作案常常具有事前有准备,作案时间有选择,作案后自杀及其他精神异常表现突出等特点。双相障碍躁狂相患者作案常常具有案发前有作案动机、作案时间选择少等特点。两组对照研究发现,抑郁症患者比躁狂症患者作案前更有准备,作案后更多出现自杀以及其他精神异常表现。

Objective： Analyzing the criminological characteristics and criminal responsibilities of patients with mood disorders to provide objective and scientific factors for forensic psychiatry. Method： Descriptively analyzed the 73 eases of forensic psychiatry about mood disorder happened over the past 8 years, and compared the criminal characteristics between depression and mania, and did the analysis of Pearson to the relativity of the criminological characteristic and responsibility. Results： Among the 73 eases, 43 （ 58.90% ） had criminal motive, 30 （41.10%） had no（ x^2 = 4. 630 , P = 0. 031 ）. 45 （ 61.60% ） eases had criminal preparation, 28 eases（38.40% ） had no counter reconnaissance, 46 eases（ 63.00 （x^2 =7.918 ,P=0.005）. Post offense： 27 eases（37.00%） were % ） were suicide or abnormal performance（ x^2 =9. 923 ,P =0.002）. Criminal responsibility： 21 eases were intact （28. 80% ）, 18 eases （24. 70% ） had no responsibility competence, and the 43 cases （46.50%） were limited （ x^2=6.154 , P = 0. 046 ）. Among the 73 eases, 43 （58.90%） were depression, 30 （41.10%） were mania （ x^2 = 4. 630 , P = 0. 031 ）. 28 cases （ 65.10% ） of depressive individuals had criminal preparation, 15（34.90% ）had no（ x^2 =7. 860 ,P =0.005）. 28 cases（65. 10%）had criminal timing, 15cases（34.90%） had no（ x^2 =7. 860 ,P =0. 005）. Response after offense： 34cases （79.10% ） were suicide or abnormal performances, 9 cases （20.90%） were counter reeonnnissance （ x^2 =10.903 ,P=0.004）. 20 cases（66.70% ）of mania individuals had criminal motive, 10 cases had no（33. 30% ） （ x^2 =6.667 ,P =0.010）. 9 cases（30.00% ）had criminal timing, 21 cases（70.00% ）had no （x^2 =9. 600 ,P =0.002）. Mania and depressed individuals had significant differences in criminal time choosing（ x^2 = 8. 718,P = 0. 003 ） and response after offence （ x^2 = 11. 574, P = 0. 001 ）. Conclusion： Patients with mood disorder always had characteristics of criminal motive, criminal preparation and suicide or other abnormal performances after offense. Majority of the mood disorders individuals with criminal behaviors were depressed, commonly with criminal preparation, criminal time choosing, and suicide or other abnormal performances after offense. The cases of mania often had criminal characteristics of criminal motive and few time choosing. Depression did not only more preparation before offence but also more abnormal performances after offence by contrast.