Efforts to remedy this state of affairs have been made repeatedly by the medical profession. The American Psychiatric Association has devoted a great deal of time and attention to this subject, unfortunately without any very concrete results. The last official action taken was the unanimous approval of the following resolutions:— [81]
"Resolved: 1. That the proved rarity of wrong acquittals on the ground of insanity is the strongest evidence that the abuse of the insanity plea in criminal cases has been unwarrantably exaggerated.
"2. That the insanity plea is not by any means raised as often as it should be, to prevent the frequent miscarriage of justice arising from the conviction and imprisonment of insane persons whose true mental condition has not been recognized.
"3. That the abuses which have crept into the method of presenting medical expert testimony have been largely the result of established legal tests and procedures, although their correction does not require radical change in the laws.
"4. That inaccessibility of the evidence on both sides of the case is the chief cause of defective medical testimony.
"5. That whenever possible the medical witness should not testify unless he has had an opportunity to make both a mental and a physical examination of the person in whose behalf the plea of insanity is raised.
"6. That we consider the hypothetical question as ordinarily presented to be unscientific, misleading and dangerous to medical repute and that the evidence on both sides should always be included in its presentation to medical witnesses.
"7. That in all criminal cases absolutely equal rights should be accorded the medical witnesses for both the prosecution and the defence for the examination of the person alleged to be insane.
"8. That in our judgment the judiciary should by legal enactment be allowed more latitude in enlightening the jury and enabling it to comprehend the nature and meaning of the medical testimony laid before it.
"9. That we recommend as advisable the adoption wherever possible of the so-called Leed's method of preliminary consultation by medical witnesses on both sides of the case as to its status.