Rearrest and linkage to mental health services among clients of the Clark County mental health court program.
ABSTRACT This study examined rearrest and linkage to mental health services among 368 misdemeanants with severe and persistent mental illness who were served by the Clark County Mental Health Court (MHC). This court, established in April 2000, is based on the concepts of therapeutic jurisprudence. This study addressed the following questions about the effectiveness of the Clark County MHC: Did MHC clients receive more comprehensive mental health services? Did the MHC successfully reduce recidivism? Were there any client or program characteristics associated with recidivism?
A secondary analysis of use of mental health services and jail data for the MHC clients enrolled from April 2000 through April 2003 was conducted. The authors used a 12-month pre-post comparison design to determine whether MHC participants experienced reduced rearrest rates for new offenses, reduced probation violations, and increased mental health services 12 months postenrollment in the MHC compared with 12 months preenrollment.
The overall crime rate for MHC participants was reduced 4.0 times one year postenrollment in the MHC compared with one year preenrollment. One year postenrollment, 54 percent of participants had no arrests, and probation violations were reduced by 62 percent. The most significant factor in determining the success of MHC participants was graduation status from the MHC, with graduates 3.7 times less likely to reoffend compared with nongraduates.
The Clark County MHC successfully reduced rearrest rates for new criminal offenses and probation violations and provided the mental health support services to stabilize mental health consumers in the community.
- SourceAvailable from: Bradley Ray[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using a statewide database of mental health court (MHC) defendants, this study examines criminal justice outcomes by target arrest offense type. Findings suggest that defendants with a felony are less likely to complete MHC but those who do are at no greater risk of recidivism post-exit than those with a misdemeanor. In terms of jail days, both completers and noncompleters with a felony had reductions in jail days; however, misdemeanor defendants, especially those who did not complete MHC, had increases. We discuss why MHC supervision may sometimes have a negative effect and offer recommendations on how courts might modify supervision.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research 06/2014; 42(3). DOI:10.1007/s10488-014-0572-2 · 3.44 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Mental health courts (MHCs), nontraditional problem-solving courts designed to address underlying causes of offending rather than apportion guilt and punishment, have been reported to reduce offending among persons with mental illness and consequently have been spreading. Graduation from a MHC has been found to be a major predictor of reduced recidivism; yet few studies have examined factors affecting MHC graduation. This study examines what participants brought to MHC, their processing in MHC, and their behaviors during MHC. It found that noncompliant participant behaviors during MHC had the strongest impact on graduation, increasing the odds of failure to graduate and reducing, if not eliminating, the direct effects on completion of the risk factors participants brought into court. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)Psychology Public Policy and Law 05/2014; 20(2-2):191-199. DOI:10.1037/law0000008 · 1.93 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Previous research has shown that mental health courts have been successful in reducing the rates of recidivism among mentally ill offenders. However, none of these studies, to date, have examined exactly what aspects of the courts reduce these rates of recidivism and what makes them successful. The current study utilized a sample of 291 mentally ill criminal offenders participating in a mental health court to examine whether those participants who were addressed by and communicated with the judge had a reduction in recidivism rates and the severity of new charges in comparison to those who did not. The hypotheses regarding greater judge-defendant communication and recidivism were not supported. This suggests that communication in and of itself is not sufficient to reduce recidivism. Future research of a qualitative nature is essential to identify if the frequency, tone, and valence of the communication results in improved outcomes. In addition, these results may indicate a necessity for more stringent training and guidelines for the maintenance of Mental Health Courts. Results of the current study suggested differences between genders, such that females were spoken to by the judge more frequently than were men.International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 12/2013; 37(3). DOI:10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.11.023 · 1.19 Impact Factor