War veterans with PTSD and criminal responsibility

With increasing numbers of veterans returning to both the United States of America (US) and United Kingdom (UK) from recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq who go on to commit offences, the question of whether their status as veterans, or for those to whom the diagnosis applies, veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) ought to affect their interactions with the criminal law is a pressing and timely one.
This thesis sets out to examine the position of war veterans with PTSD with respect to the criminal law, in general, and criminal responsibility, in particular. The question is how ought a liberal democratic state treat war veterans with PTSD who commit crimes as a result of their PTSD? This question is addressed in three steps. First, it examines the claim that war veterans are owed gratitude in some way or other and that this argument explains why war veterans ought to be in some special category of defendants. In light of this, second, the thesis then looks at whether war veterans with PTSD who commit crimes are able to offer a defence such as insanity, automatism, self-defence, and diminished responsibility. Third, and finally, it looks at whether war veterans with PTSD ought to be able to appeal for mitigation.
In addressing this question, the thesis draws on examples from the USA and England and on the philosophy of criminal law. The goal of this thesis is to present evidence, and clarification regarding philosophical issues of criminal responsibility with respect to veterans with PTSD to fill a gap in the literature.