# Beyond Legal Rights: Understanding Mental Health and Autonomy in Criminal Self‐Representation

## TL;DR

This study explores why some criminal defendants in Israel choose to represent themselves in court, highlighting the role of mental health, autonomy, and past legal experiences.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into the social and psychological factors influencing self-representation in criminal court, particularly in Israel.

## Key findings

- Mental health challenges and a desire for autonomy are key factors in defendants' decisions to self-represent.
- Negative prior legal experiences and mistrust of attorneys also contribute to self-representation choices.
- The research suggests a need for policy reforms to support vulnerable self-representing defendants.

## Abstract

This qualitative study examines criminal defendants who waived legal representation to self‐represent in court. Through interviews with 16 participants and courtroom observations, findings reveal intersecting factors driving this decision: mental health challenges, desire for autonomy, attorney mistrust, dissatisfaction with past legal experiences, and underestimation of legal complexities. The research highlights defendants' vulnerability when exercising this right and connects negative prior legal encounters with self‐representation choices. These insights into Israeli pro se defense suggest policy reforms balancing autonomy with support mechanisms. By prioritizing defendants' narratives, this research illuminates self‐representation's social and psychological dimensions, advancing discourse on this understudied phenomenon.