Recently, according to media report, a woman in the Mix in Qingdao smashed the Chanel counter angrily, during which the woman had a physical confrontation with the shop assistant, and constantly pulled the shop assistant's clothes.After investigation, the woman suffering from schizophrenia.That night, the woman was taken to Qingdao Anning psychological hospital for treatment and care, and the case is still under further investigation.A netizen commented on Weibo, ‘The compensation should be paid and don't excuse yourself by saying you are mentally abnormal!’
So, who should compensate for mental patient tort?Should mental patient be responsible for hurting others?
According to the ability of mental patients to express their ideas, they can be divided into two categories: one is the mental patients who cannot identify their own behavior (that is, people without civil competence), and the other is the mental patients who cannot fully identify their own behavior (that is, people with limited civil competence).When mental patient tort, the guardian is often the most unfortunate one.
From the perspective of civil compensation, if a person without civil competence or a person with limited civil competence causes damage to others, his guardian shall bear civil liability.If the guardian has performed his duty of guardianship, his civil liability may be appropriately mitigated.If a person with property without or with limited competence for civil conduct causes damage to another person, he shall pay compensation from his own property.The deficiency shall be appropriately compensated by the guardian, except when the unit is the guardian.
From the perspective of criminal responsibility, if a mental patient who has not completely lost the ability to identify or control his own conduct commits a crime, he shall bear criminal responsibility, but he may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment.The criminal law stipulates that the criminal acts of mental patients should be treated differently: first, intermittent mental patients commit crimes when they are in normal mental state, and they bear the same criminal responsibility as ordinary people; Second, if a mental patient who has not completely lost the ability to recognize or control his own conduct commits a crime, he shall still bear criminal responsibility, but he may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment; Third, if a mental patient who is determined by legal procedures to be unable to identify or control his own conduct when committing the crime, he shall not bear criminal responsibility and his guardian shall be ordered to guard him and send him on medical treatment.If his act seriously endangers public safety or the personal safety of a citizen, and it is possible to continue to endanger the society, the court shall decide whether it is necessary to have compulsory medical treatment.
In recent years, the cases occur frequently in which the suspect uses the mental illness to commit the financial crime, involving the cases suspected credit card fraud that occur most frequently. So, does mental patient need not return when running up the credit card?Of course!Indeed, this only worsens the financial situation of patients’ families.In-depth analysis of this kind of cases, we could summarize three points as follows: first, mental patients premeditated, which suspected credit card fraud; Second, the bank information verification system is not rigorous, and the staff handle business blindly for the performance; Third, the guardian’s guardianship duty is lax.
Families are too weak to prevent the mental patient from infringing.Some families even use the way of fetter, bind to imprison a patient, which violates the right of patient liberty undoubtedly.Governments, communities and hospitals should adopt comprehensive measures to curb these potential hazards to the greatest extent.
