Search results

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.

In December 2007, Lord Bradley was asked by the Government, in a six‐month period, to review court liaison and diversion schemes for mentally ill people. A year and a half later, and having extended the brief to encompass the entire criminal justice system, Lord Bradley has reported. The Government has now responded to Bradleys’ findings (Ministry of Justice, 2009) so it is timely to comment on the review particularly in relation to prisons in England. The English prison population is almost at its highest ever level and currently stands at around 82,000 people ‐ according to the Prison Service’s standard of certified normal accommodation, the prison population is now 8000 more than it should be. As HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers, has noted ‘activity and support from staff . . . were the two things thought to be most helpful by prisoners with mental health and emotional problems, in over‐crowded and under‐resourced prisons these essential elements of care are at a premium’ (HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2007).

School-university partnerships are enhanced by synergistic relationships. Positive outcomes increase when partners work across disciplines, focus on cultural competencies, and expand from local to global engagement. This chapter offers an overview of the Bradley Professional Development Schools (PDS) Partnership, a description of the Comprehensive Integrated Services Model, and a summary of current thinking about synergy and cultural competencies in relation to school–university partnerships. Through descriptions of various multidisciplinary PDS projects and partnerships, the chapter explores concepts such as emergent realities, cross-cultural, intercultural or global competencies, empowering learning culture, and global awareness, demonstrating how an comprehensive integrated services model that is holistic in nature sustains school–university partnerships in multiple and creative ways across local and global environments.

The Bradley Report (Bradley, 2009) has raised a number of important questions regarding the treatment of individuals who are experiencing mental health problems and find themselves in the criminal justice system. One of the key recommendations is that professional staff working across criminal justice organisations should receive increased training in this area. This paper explores the experiences of two professionals, a mental health nurse and a social worker, involved in providing training for police officers. It goes on to consider the most effective models of training for police officers.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the perspectives of prisoners and prison staff in relation to mental wellbeing and the negotiation of barriers to accessing and providing support. This small-scale study includes the experiences of 11 prison staff and 9 prisoners within a Category D male prison.

A focus group was conducted with the prisoners and interviews with prison staff. Thematic analysis identified three core themes: “context enabling factors”, “barriers to accessing support for mental wellbeing” and “peer support roles”.

Prisoners conveyed a reluctance in reporting mental health issues due to the fear of being transferred to closed conditions. All staff indicated the benefits of peer support roles.

Further research is required on a wider scale, as it is acknowledged that the findings of this study are from one prison and may not apply to other settings. Although there are barriers that may impact the reporting of mental wellbeing issues, there may be small relational steps that can be taken to address these.

Few studies exist that explore the nuances and barriers within open prisons, perhaps due to the overwhelming need within closed conditions. A context-specific approach considering early prevention strategies to support a safer prison system and successful rehabilitation is explored. The combination of prisoner and staff experiences is of value to both academia and policymakers.

The purpose of the paper is to report the findings of a small scale indicative research project. The project explores the assessment of detained persons in police custody by Forensic Physicians (FP).

A range of information was collected in every case where custody staff had identified a mental health concern and requested an FP assessment. As well as information about demographic factors, this would include questions regarding any links that the individuals had with community‐based mental health services. As well as this information, anonymous custody records and force adverse incident records for the month were examined.

In the month of the project, 59 FP assessments were requested. Only six members of this group had any contact with community‐based mental health services: two with a social worker, two with a CPN and two with a psychiatrist. Of this group, three had not been in contact with mental health services for over a month.

The size of the cohort and variety of arrangements for providing nursing and social care support in custody settings may limit the generalisation of the findings.

This study highlights that there is a group of individuals whose mental health causes concern to the police in a custody environment. In this study, the overwhelming majority of the group have no contact with mental health services. The research supports the recommendations of the Bradley Review for wider health care provision in custody settings.

The paper highlights that fully effective community mental health services need to consider police custody settings as a key point for intervention.

Guidance has recently been issued to police officers on how to respond to people with learning disabilities and mental illnesses. We review this Guidance and comment on some of the advice, in the context of current issues and concerns. This article contains a brief summary of the Guidance, but for more detailed coverage, we recommend that the Guidance itself be consulted.