2 Answers

  1. Must not. The subject of a crime is a sane person. A person with a split personality (in this context) is not able to realize the actual nature and social danger of their actions, or to direct them.

  2. This is a very twofold situation. It is impossible to give an unambiguous answer, in principle, as well as to any question in the field of philosophy and ethics. Let me explain.
    Here the question lies more in the plane of morality than in the question of law. You see what's the matter. In dissociative identity disorder, several personalities can live inside one person, which are radically different from the” owner ” of the body and from each other. With different views on life, with different morals. Maybe one of the alter-states of a person does not want to die in this way at all and therefore leads an internal struggle, worse plots can be played out in the head of a sick person than in Game of Thrones. And, it seems, everything is clear here. If there is an individual living there, then we must provide them with protection. But the bottom line is that this person is only in the consciousness of a particular person, is located only within his mental activity and rarely happens when he notifies the “external” world of his existence. Only during the period of exacerbation of the disease, of course.
    Based on this, we can conclude that the person “sitting” inside the patient does not exist in the field of vision of all mankind (since, literally, no one sees it except the “carrier”), does not bring absolutely no benefit to society, only creates “interference” for the life of the patient and others. Of course, I am not an expert, but I have not heard of any recorded cases when the alter ego “broke out” and completely absorbed the activity of the body and the person became literally “different”, and even this” person ” is not registered anywhere as a full member of society. Therefore, no, from a legal point of view, this situation is not a hostage situation.
    From what has been said above, we can deduce an absolutely populist theory that most (if not all) of the great minds of humanity had “alter egos” in their heads-so Bach and Munch and Aristotle and Dumas the Elder created their works “not with their own hands”. But let's leave it to the demagogues.
    The situation here is generally similar to that with robots and artificial intelligence. “Can a robot be considered a separate person?”, ” What if mentally ill people are not sick?”. We can ask these two questions for an infinite time, but they will only come to a head when we reach a specific stage in scientific and technological progress. When, for example, there will be devices that allow you to” look ” inside the human brain without opening it, go into consciousness itself. And then, perhaps, it will really be proved that the ego states of the mentally ill are individuals worthy of life. They will come up with a way to transfer these personalities to new bodies and a monument will be erected to the “victims “of the punitive” psychiatry of the past”.
    What will happen in the end? Time will tell you.

Leave a Reply