Write 8 pages with APA style on SUNY Empire State College. According to the law in Texas, in order to establish an insanity defence, the accused should show that they could not differentiate between bad and good while committing the crime. Did the State prove their case? This case provides explanation with regard to the psychological research in the court’s ruling and supports the court ruling in accordance to the evidence of the psychological research. This paper will show the positive and negative sides of the use of psychological research and testimony within the case of Texas vs Andrea Yates. In the Texas vs. Andrea Yates case, some material and key issues surfaced within the management of the case. The performance of mental illness to the juries or judges, along with, information & evaluation of the impact of mental illness as it relates to criminal conduct and responsibility (Wang, Chen, Chin & Lee, 2005). There are contemporary concerns on the potential impact of mental illnesses within the fairness of the court procedures in capital cases. Additionally, the American Psychological Association indicates that severe mental disorders can significantly reduce a person’s capacities to reason rationally and to suppress conduct that violates the law. The American Psychological Association strongly supports the insanity defence because it offers the criminal justice system a method for recognizing unfair penalty to the mentally ill person. We should not assume that the defendant Andrea is evil. The National Alliance for the “mentally ill” is a grassroots advocacy organization for citizens with severe mental illnesses. Today there is psychosocial treatment, medications, and support that work to improve the most intense symptoms of these illnesses. Did Dr. Dietz decide to ignore various symptoms pointing to the appellant’s continued use of medication? It is believed by many that, he should have been more thorough in his detail of her medical follow up. Considering the appellant, there was a time when her mental status appeared unstable and in need of the necessary medical and/or therapeutic interventions to reduce her depression. The court provided information regarding Andrea’s suffering from mental illness and that she had wanted to commit suicide (Godfrey, 2005). On June 18, 1999, the appellant suffered severe depression, which led her to trying to commit suicide through an overdose. The appellant’s mother, while at the appellant’s home noticed that Andrea Yates was almost catatonic, slow to respond to dialogue or no response at all. Some of the factors noted that led to the Andrea Yate’s decline were five pregnancies, home schooling her children, and living in a bus. Dr. Dietz should have noticed that the appellant was not taking her medicines and testified with a lack of support to the medical advice suggested. Mrs. Yates began to withdraw, was not eating well, and had trouble sleeping and established thoughts of being a terrible mother. Dr. Dietz had no knowledge of post-partum disorders. He stopped treating patients in 1981 or 1982 with post-partum depression. He testified that Andrea Yates was sane. She knew she had done something wrong and expressed that “it was the work of the devil”. He told the jurors that she did not have hallucinations but that her mother indicated that she had observed them (Wang, Chen, Chin & Lee, 2005). Andrea Yates had a history of mental illness that included hospitalization and medication. This led to her admission under suicide watch. April 13, 2001, she began an outpatient program at Devereux and May 4, 2001 was readmitted to Devereux and discharged on May 14, 2001. She was prescribed Haldol medication. The degree of stress does not change.