Freire, Dercirier. Paranoia and crime: of the right to psychoanalysis.

Abstract

Undoubtedly, wanting to think of crime from two fields of knowledge, Law and Psychoanalysis, is not an easy task, since what is at stake is the concept of madness, which in turn implies the question crucial as regards the responsibility or otherwise of an act. Legal theory relies on psychiatry, inasmuch as the fate of the perpetrator of the criminal act depends on an award given by a forensic psychiatrist. Imputable if diagnosed as "mentally ill."

Or Guilty if it is considered considered sane. The prison or the psychiatric hospital is the destination. Here comes not only the contribution of Dercirier's book, but also his proposal: why does not law take into account what psychoanalysis has to say about madness? This is the unwritten but implicit question between the lines. For psychoanalysis there is no normal / abnormal dichotomy, but structures.

There are structures: psychosis, perversion and neurosis. Moreover, for psychoanalysis every individual is responsible for his actions. That is: unlike Law, in every action practiced by man, regardless of his clinical structure, there is a subjective implication. But from the point of view of law, madness exempts the author from his act, gagging his speech and cloistering him, most of the time, even to death, in a mental asylum.