Forensic psychiatry: irresistible impulse: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Forensic psychiatry: irresistible impulse

Sample item

Which test of criminal responsibility, accepted in some jurisdictions but not under Indian law, would excuse an accused who knew his act was wrong but was unable to control his behaviour because of mental disease?

AThe doctrine of res ipsa loquiturBThe McNaghten ruleCThe Bolam testDThe irresistible impulse test

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

D. The irresistible impulse test

The irresistible impulse test recognises a volitional defect: the accused knew the act was wrong but could not resist doing it. The McNaghten rule, followed in India (Section 84 IPC, now Section 22 BNS), is cognitive and asks only whether he knew the nature of the act or that it was wrong. The other two are concepts of medical negligence.

Option by option

A. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
Res ipsa loquitur is a doctrine of negligence in which the act speaks for itself.
B. The McNaghten rule
McNaghten is cognitive, and it does not excuse a person who knew the act was wrong.
C. The Bolam test
The Bolam test is the standard of care in negligence.
D. The irresistible impulse test (correct)
Correct. The irresistible impulse test addresses loss of control.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is D, The irresistible impulse test. The irresistible impulse test recognises a volitional defect: the accused knew the act was wrong but could not resist doing it.

Why is "The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur" not the answer?

Res ipsa loquitur is a doctrine of negligence in which the act speaks for itself.

Why is "The McNaghten rule" not the answer?

McNaghten is cognitive, and it does not excuse a person who knew the act was wrong.

Why is "The Bolam test" not the answer?

The Bolam test is the standard of care in negligence.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Forensic psychiatry: irresistible impulse in Forensic Medicine. The McNaghten rule, followed in India (Section 84 IPC, now Section 22 BNS), is cognitive and asks only whether he knew the nature of the act or that it was wrong. The other two are concepts of medical negligence.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as an application question: it asks you to use a fact on a patient or a finding. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Forensic psychiatry: irresistible impulse?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.