Pathologising women and girls in the courtroom

Dr Jess discusses the way psychiatric labels are used against women in criminal and family court

One of the most dangerous places where psychiatry is used to discredit women is in the courtroom. Whether they are victims seeking justice, witnesses in a case, or defendants facing charges themselves, women and girls are often pathologised to undermine their credibility and silence their voices.

In my 2022 book, ‘Sexy But Psycho’, I explore how the courtroom has become a battleground where women’s mental health is used against them, perpetuating a system of injustice that protects perpetrators and punishes victims - very often, using the very same diagnoses for both sides.

Women who enter the legal system - whether as survivors of violence or as defendants - are often subjected to intense scrutiny, not only of their actions but of course, of their mental health.

Their psychiatric history, emotional responses, and past diagnoses are frequently used to discredit them, to frame them as unreliable, hysterical, disordered, paranoid, crazy, unstable, and to justify outcomes that disproportionately harm women. This practice of pathologising women in the courtroom is deeply rooted in the same patriarchal attitudes that have long sought to control and silence women.

Weaponising Mental Health Against Women in Court

In cases of domestic violence, rape, or sexual assault, women seeking justice are often met with suspicion and scepticism - regardless of their mental health.

Instead of being believed, their stories are picked apart, and their emotional responses are scrutinised for signs of instability. I’ve seen many cases where a woman’s psychiatric history - whether it’s a decades-old diagnosis of depression, a recent doctors visit about anxiety, or any other mental health condition - is used to discredit her testimony and undermine her credibility. Rather than focusing on the violence she has been subjected to, the courtroom discussion shifts to whether she is mentally ‘unstable’ or ‘hysterical.’

Code words for: ‘is she making it up?’

This weaponisation of mental health against women is particularly harmful in cases of sexual violence. Women who report rape are already subject to victim-blaming, but when a psychiatric diagnosis is introduced, it becomes even easier for defence teams to paint them as unreliable or untrustworthy. The focus shifts from the actions of the perpetrator to the mental state of the victim, creating a dynamic where the victim’s trauma is turned into a reason to doubt her.

And of course, trauma is common in these cases, so it is very easy for professionals to turn that trauma into ‘proof’ of instability.

In essence, psychiatric diagnoses are used to frame women as irrational or delusional, casting doubt on their ability to accurately remember or interpret events. This practice not only discredits women in the eyes of the court, but also reinforces harmful stereotypes about women being emotionally unstable and prone to exaggeration.

Pathologising Women as Defendants

But what about when women commit crime? What about women who are respondents in family court?

The courtroom is not only hostile to women as victims, but also as defendants. Women who face charges - particularly in cases involving violence - or respondents in family court cases of divorce, child custody, and concerns raised about child abuse - are often pathologised in ways that men are not. Women are much more likely to be diagnosed with personality disorders or mood disorders, and these diagnoses are then used to justify harsher sentences, the removal of their children, the total dismissal of their concerns about their children being at risk from the other parent, or their commitment to psychiatric institutions and therapeutic treatments that they must adhere to - whether they consent or not.

I’ve seen cases where women who have acted in self-defence in abuse are labelled as ‘mentally ill’ rather than being recognised as survivors of violence. These women are painted as irrational, emotionally unstable, or even dangerous, while the abuse they have endured is minimised or ignored. This discussion reminds me of several cases of teenage girls who eventually attacked adult men who were raping and trafficking them in the UK and in the US, who were framed as having personality disorders and bipolar disorder - rather than anyone using any common sense that they were teenage girls being raped, drugged and beaten - and eventually fought back.

To make myself clear here, however, where women have committed crimes of their own accord - whether that be abuse, murder, theft or any other crime - I am not saying that I think they should be dealt with leniently - just that I don’t think they commit crime because they are ‘unstable’ or ‘mentally disordered’ - and this system is yet another way of framing women and girls as psychiatry patients instead of humans with autonomy - good or bad.

The courtroom becomes a place where women’s trauma is not only discredited but also weaponised against them. Their emotional responses to violence and abuse are reframed as evidence of mental illness, which can result in longer prison sentences than a man would get for the same crime, loss of parental rights, or forced psychiatric treatment.

Misogyny in Psychiatric Assessments

Misogyny and sex bias in psychiatric assessments plays a significant role in how women are treated in the legal system. Especially, as these systems are so heavily entwined these days.

Women are far more likely to be diagnosed with mood disorders, personality disorders, and almost every other psychiatric condition in the DSM than men, even when they exhibit similar behaviours. Many peer reviewed papers have found that the number one factor that correlates with all mental disorders… is being female. Amazing for us!

This gendered approach to mental health often results in women being over-pathologised and over-medicated, while men are more likely to be seen as rational actors, even when they commit acts of violence. Their anger is seen as contextual. Their violence is ‘reactionary’. Their emotions are seen as justified. Further, they are often framed as needing help for their mental health - or - their crimes are framed as accidents or loss of control.

In the courtroom, this same bias translates into harsher outcomes for women. Women who are diagnosed with psychiatric disorders are seen as more unpredictable, more dangerous, and less capable of caring for their children, making accurate reports to police or social care, or making rational decisions. These assessments are then used to justify punitive measures, such as removal of custody of children - or the transfer of residency to an abusive ex who predictably claims she’s insane - and is then believed.

The double standard is clear: men’s actions are often excused as rational or justified, while women’s actions are scrutinised through the lens of mental illness. This bias not only harms women but also reinforces harmful gender stereotypes that position women as inherently emotional and unstable.

The Intersection of ‘Mental Health’ and Motherhood

The intersection of mental health and motherhood is particularly damaging in the legal system. Women who are diagnosed with psychiatric disorders are often deemed unfit to be mothers, regardless of the context of their diagnosis or the reality of their parenting abilities. I’ve seen women lose custody of their children simply because they were diagnosed with depression or anxiety, even when their children were well-cared for and their parenting was not in question.

I’ve seen cases in which completely healthy mums raised concerns that their children were being abused, were ordered to undertake psychiatric assessments, willingly went to those assessments knowing there was nothing they could find, only to be diagnosed with some random disorder they didn’t have, and for their disclosures and reports to suddenly be turned on their head. It’s a very dangerous system.

All it really takes is someone - an ex-partner, a social worker, a therapist - to raise concerns about the ‘mental health’ of a mother, and the process kicks in fast - and harsh. Interestingly, much faster and much harsher than when abusers actually abuse kids - which can take years or decades for anyone to even notice.

The pathologisation of women in family courts is a direct consequence of the same patriarchal attitudes that view women’s emotions as inherently dangerous. Mothers are expected to be calm, stable, and nurturing at all times, and any deviation from this ideal is seen as a sign of unfitness. Her trauma doesn’t matter, and if she shows how upset or scared she is, she’s pathologised or framed as exaggerating.

When mental disorder diagnoses are introduced, the courtroom becomes a place where women’s right to parent is questioned, and psychiatric labels are used to justify the removal of their children.

This dynamic disproportionately affects women who have experienced trauma or violence. Rather than being offered support, they are pathologised and punished, their trauma reframed as a sign of mental instability rather than a response to the abuse they have endured.

A Call for Change

The pathologisation of women in the courtroom is a practice that must be challenged.

Women’s trauma, emotional responses, and psychiatric histories should not be used as weapons to discredit them or justify punitive measures. We need a legal system that recognises the impact of trauma on mental health and that treats women with compassion and understanding, rather than suspicion and judgement.

Trauma-informed care and anti-pathologising, anti-misogyny approaches must be introduced into the courtroom to ensure that women are treated fairly, whether they are victims or defendants. Psychiatric diagnoses should not be used to silence women or to strip them of their credibility. Instead, we must focus on creating a legal system that validates women’s experiences and supports them in seeking justice and healing.

What would Jess say?

The courtroom is one of the most (if not the most) dangerous places where psychiatry is used to discredit and control women. Whether they are victims of male violence or mothers in family court, women are often pathologised in ways that seek to undermine their credibility and silence their voices. It’s time to challenge this practice and push for a legal system that respects women’s mental health and trauma, rather than using it as a weapon against them.

For this reason and many others I have written about for years now, I will be launching a new service soon - so if you need support with pathologisation, feel free get in touch.