Search results

Large numbers of adults with mental illness detained by police, seen in the courts, and confined in prisons and jails has been a longstanding concern of officials in the mental health and criminal justice systems. Diversion programs represent an important strategy to counteract the criminalization of persons with mental illness. The challenge is to identify and integrate resources in such a way that an organization bridging the police, courts, mental health, substance abuse, homelessness, welfare and entitlements agencies would evolve that would effectively and appropriately serve offenders with mental health issues, keeping them stable in the community and reducing recidivism.

Mental health courts (MHCs) may enable better support for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) within the criminal justice system (CJS) but little evaluative empirical evidence is available regarding their operation. The purpose of this paper is to explore professional perceptions of the challenges of including people with ID in a targeted services court (TSC) designed for people with mental health issues and ID.

Information was gathered, via interviews and focus groups, from 46 professionals working with people with mental health issues and ID within the TSC. Data were analysed by using thematic network analysis.

Findings highlight the neglect and lack of inclusion of people with ID within the TSC processes, with challenges in identifying people with ID, stakeholder awareness, inconsistent adapting of practices for people with ID and information transfer underpinned by the involvement of numerous organisations with differing agendas.

Although valued, development of a TSC, including people with ID, was a challenging endeavour and may reflect societal and institutional neglect of people with ID, recommendations are provided.

This study adds to the few investigations that have considered the process of including people with ID in a TSC from the perspective of those working in the CJS.

This article considers The Bradley Report and specifically its implications for dual diagnosis. This includes implications for dual diagnosis services, drug courts and mental health courts, role of liaison and diversion, and continuity of care on release.

This paper aims to examine the ways in which the criminal justice system has evolved to accommodate mental illness. Mental health courts are one such alternative; these courts actively seek rehabilitative and therapeutic outcomes for participants. However, current literature suggests that these courts are ineffective for offenders who have been diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD).

The aim of the current inquiry was to determine the degree to which participation in the Assessment and Referral Court (ARC) List in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria reduced re-offending rates for offenders diagnosed with BPD by providing a comparative analysis of pre and post ARC List offending.

The results of a two-year recidivism study suggest that successful completion of the ARC List reduces recidivism for 50% of offenders diagnosed with BPD.

To the authoring team’s knowledge, this is the second paper to explore the efficacy of the Assessment of Referral Court List (Magistrates’ Court of Victoria) in reducing recidivist behaviours for programme participants; however, it is the first paper to look specifically at the recidivist behaviours of participants of the Assessment of Referral Court List (Magistrates’ Court of Victoria) who have been diagnosed with BPD.

The purpose of this study was to describe programs that aim at programs to divert people with a mental condition from the criminal justice system to mental health services are being initiated, but reporting is limited and fragmented. This study described programs that aim at diverting persons with mental health conditions out of criminal justice systems to community mental health services, with the intention to inform research and practice.

A scoping review was used to map and synthesise diversion programs. Ten online data bases were searched. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews was used to direct the selection of sources. Research and evaluation publications and grey literature published from 2010 to 2021 in English language were included.

Eight distinct diversion programs were identified across 24 countries or territories covering five phases of the criminal justice process. Diversion programs included crisis intervention teams, the electronic linkage system, mobile crisis units, the criminal justice liaison program, problem-solving courts, the abstinence-based program, the community equivalence program and the forensic assertive community treatment program. Although distinct programs have the potential to form a system of diversion across the continuum of the criminal justice process, only two territories moved in that direction. Diversion programs reported overwhelmingly originated from high-income countries.

Stigma that labels people with mental health conditions as violent and dangerous need to be addressed. It is important to place diversion systems on national policy agendas and advocate for evidence-based interventions.

The study provides a blueprint on diversion systems to set a research agenda and develop a road map, tailored towards local contexts.

Over the last decade many ‘diversion from custody’ schemes have been established and there is evidence of their effectiveness in reducing the number of mentally disordered offenders inappropriately remanded in custody. In North Wales there has been pressure to establish such a scheme but it is not clearwhether models developed in large urban areas are applicable to the problems of a rural community.This paper describes a study of male prisoners remanded in custody from North Wales during a four month period to identify need for such a service. In four months 298 prisoners were remanded from North Wales. Only seven courts remanded more than 16 (equivalent to one remand per week); the busiest court remanded 83, equivalent to five per week.In total, 42 prisoners reported a history of mental disorder; records were available on 28 of these, of whom ten were considered to have a mental disorder requiring admission.Only a small number of individuals in this study required diversion from custody (approximately one per week), but in those cases there was significant unmet need. The conclusion was that an effective diversion scheme would have to be able to provide a service to numerous and widely spread courts, most with a low level of activity.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss five domains impacted by the transformation of correctional mental health care in the USA: public health, public safety, legal obligations, fiscal responsibility and ethical standards, as well as critical issues such as administrative segregation, suicide prevention and reentry planning.

In the last four decades, the USA has seen a sizable growth in its criminal justice system and corrections population. It has also seen reductions in civil and community-based mental health care. Persons with mental disabilities have come to represent a highly disproportional segment of the corrections population. The paper discusses the implications and underlying causes of these developments as well as recent responses to them.

This set of circumstances is starting to change the mission of correctional health services from crisis intervention and suicide prevention to include preparation for the inmate's almost inevitable return to the community.

Such changes have led to further developments in correctional mental health care, in particular, policy designed to treat mental illness, reduce its destructive outcomes such as suicide, and facilitate successful reentry into the community in attempts to reduce recidivism and improve clinical outcomes. Mental health care professionals working within corrections have likewise faced ethical challenges in effectuating treatment.

In the UK, the mental health treatment requirement (MHTR) order for offenders on probation has been underused. A MHTR service was established to assess the effectiveness of a partnership between a probation service, a link worker charity and an independent mental healthcare provider. Short-term structured cognitive behavioural interventions were delivered by psychology graduates with relevant work experience and training. Training for the judiciary on the MHTR and the new service led to a significant increase in the use of MHTR orders. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A total of 56 (of 76 MHTR offenders) completed treatment in the first 12 months. A single cohort pre-post follow-up design was used to evaluate change in the following domains: mental health and wellbeing; coping skills; social adjustment; and criminal justice outcomes. Mental health treatment interventions were delivered under supervision by two psychology graduates who had relevant work experience and who were trained in short term, structured, cognitive behavioural (CBT) interventions.

Clinically significant changes were obtained on measures of anxiety and depression, and on measures of social problem solving, emotional regulation and self-efficacy. Ratings of work and social adjustment and pre-post ratings of dynamic criminogenic risk factors also improved. This new initiative has addressed the moral argument for equality of access to mental health services for offenders given a community order.

While the current initiative represents one of a number of models designed to increase the collaboration between the criminal justice and the mental health systems, this is the first within the UK to deliver a therapeutic response at the point of sentencing for offenders with mental health problems. The significant increase in the provision of MHTR community orders in the first year of the project has been associated with a decrease in the number of psychiatric reports requested that are time consuming and do not lead to a rapid treatment.

The mental health court is the newest venue for rerouting persons with mental illness from the criminal justice system to the treatment system. Mental health courts share with drug courts the mission of offering therapeutic alternatives to jail. But their success, however, depends on the nature of the illnesses to which they attempt to treat, the strength of the connection between those illnesses and criminal behavior, and the effectiveness of treatment as a deterrent. To explore these connections, mental health courts are assessed through the lens of therapeutic jurisprudence. From theoretical and practical perspectives, mental health courts are found to have substantial limitations in terms of their potential impact on criminal behavior and incarceration of people with mental illness. Serious concerns about fairness are also raised. An alternative strategy for judicial intervention on behalf of offenders with mental illness is suggested.

Various attempts have been made to understand and resolve the enduring lack of cohesiveness of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), their dysfunctional service delivery and the feelings of distress among some of the professionals who work in them. Distortions in forensic MDTs have sometimes compromised service delivery and effective risk management. Several public inquiries relating to high‐profile incidents in forensic mental health have noted the role of dysfunctional MDTs. This paper describes the philosophy, structure, functions and achievements of a forensic community MDT in Wellington, New Zealand. It explains a model of care that is adaptable, comprehensive, effective and evidence‐based. It highlights the role of the extended MDT and embedded cultural units from which care professionals work together, share a common philosophy of care and tailor their care to the needs of the individuals or populations they serve.