The Final Report made numerous recommendations, including for reform of the
psychiatric hospital system, of
forensic psychiatry, and the
insanity defence. One major recommendation has largely now been implemented - the setting up of secure psychiatric units in each region of the country. The Butler Committee subjected the wording of the
insanity defence to intense criticism, noting that the rules were "based on too limited a concept of the nature of mental disorder", highlighting "the outmoded language of the
M'Naghten Rules which gives rise to problems of interpretation" and arguing that the rules were "based on the now obsolete belief in the pre-eminent role of reason in controlling social behaviour... [the rules] are not therefore a satisfactory test of criminal responsibility". An additional criticism was that the defence puts the
burden of proof onto the defendant, while in all other cases the burden is on the prosecution. The Committee proposed reform of the law along these lines, which was largely taken up by a draft bill produced by the
Law Commission in 1989; so far, however, these have both been ignored by successive governments. The committee's alternative to the insanity defence, which it termed 'not guilty on evidence of mental disorder', has itself been criticised; for example for focusing largely on
psychosis rather than the full range of mental disorders, and for assuming a causal link between such conditions and any particular actions of the individual (though acknowledging in theory that there might not be such a link in some particular hard to imagine case). The committee also suggested that
psychopathy should be removed from the law and replaced with 'personality disorder'. 'Psychopathic disorder' was at that time a category in the Mental Health Act, and would remain so until being removed by amendments in 2007. The committee's report said the understanding was so varied that theories about psychopathy should 'only to be understood as reference to the particular sense in which the term is employed by the psychiatrists in question". Most of the committee's recommendations on
fitness to plead were incorporated into the
Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991, such as the requirement for expert evidence on fitness from two medical practitioners and, if found unfit by the judge, a hearing of the facts in place of a full trial. The
Law Commission is still, as of 2013, consulting on and making proposals for reform of the law on 'insanity' and 'sane
automatism and fitness to plead. ==References==