The Debate Between Psychiatry and the Law

Abstract

The reprinting by the Institute of Psychiatry, on its fiftieth anniversary, of Dr. Peter Scott's paper (1) describing Maudsley's work as a pioneer in criminology reminds us of the prominent part Maudsley played in the debate between psychiatrists and lawyers which has been in progress for nearly a century and a half, with, for much of that time, little satisfaction for either side. It is a classic example of the difficulties of inter-disciplinary communication. My only qualification to be the Maudsley Lecturer is that I happen to be doubly qualified in law and medicine, and, as Chairman of the Institute, a good deal closer to psychiatry than most lawyers. My qualities as an interpreter must therefore make good the intellectual deficiencies of which a glance at the list of my forty-seven distinguished predecessors makes me acutely conscious.