Exploring structural stigma towards mental disorders: An analysis of trial verdicts

Abstract

Mental health issues, particularly depression, often carry a stigma that can infiltrate various societal institutions, including the legal system. This study investigates the structural stigma associated with depression within the context of second-instance criminal trials in China, examining trial verdicts from 2009 to 2023. Through a detailed analysis of 171 cases using Semantic Network Analysis, Critical Discourse Analysis, and logistic regression, this research elucidates the complex ways in which depression is considered in judicial decisions. The findings identify three thematic responses—Neutral Evaluation, Sympathetic Consideration, and Rigorous Standards—that encapsulate diverse judicial attitudes towards the impact of depression on criminal responsibility. Critical Discourse Analysis further reveals three prevailing legal discourses—Stringent Criteria, Inconsistent Approaches, and Individual Negligence—that significantly influence the treatment of defendants with depression. The results also show a declining trend in recognizing depression as a mitigating factor, jointly influenced by crime type, defendant gender, and defendant’s education level, suggesting a shift towards more stringent judicial interpretations over time. These findings underscore the critical need for judicial reforms aimed at reducing stigma and promoting a more equitable treatment of mental health issues in the legal system.