Mentally disordered offenders: from forensic state hospital to conditional release in California

Role of Mandated Community Treatment for Justice-Involved Individuals With Serious Mental Illness

OBJECTIVE

Research has suggested that increased length of mandated community treatment for individuals with a serious mental disorder leads to better outcomes, but few studies have described whether these outcomes are maintained after treatment ends. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of court-mandated treatment on outcomes for individuals found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) and released to the community.

METHODS

Ninety-three patients who were found to be NGRI participated in this study. Rearrest rates were compared for three groups: patients released to the community with court-mandated treatment (conditional release), patients who were conditionally released but later "restored to sanity" with no further court supervision, and patients released from the hospital to the community by the court with no court-imposed conditions. Patients were followed for an average of 4.83 years after discharge.

RESULTS

Nearly half (43.8%) of the patients released to the community without court-mandated supervision were arrested for another offense in the study period, compared with 8.2% of patients released under the supervision of the conditional release program. In contrast, those who were restored to sanity and ultimately released unconditionally had higher arrest rates (25%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that court oversight on an ongoing basis may be necessary to help justice-involved individuals with a serious mental disorder avoid the criminal justice system and remain engaged in community treatment. More research is needed to determine whether these findings can be extrapolated to civil commitment procedures.

Mental Health Professionals' Attitudes Toward Offenders With Mental Illness (Insanity Acquittees) in Ghana

Mental health professionals' attitudes toward offenders with mental illness have significant implications for the quality of care and treatment rendered, making it imperative for these professionals to be aware of their attitudes. Yet, this topical issue has received little research attention. Consequently, the present study investigates attitudes toward offenders with mental illness (insanity acquittees) in a sample of 113 registered mental health nurses in Ghana. Using a cross-sectional survey and self-report methodology, the participants respond to measures of attitudes toward offenders with mental illness, attitudes toward mental illness, conviction proneness, and criminal blameworthiness. The results show that mental health nurses who reportedly practiced for a longer duration (6 years and above) were more likely to be unsympathetic, while the male nurses who were aged 30 years and above were more likely to hold offenders with mental illness strictly liable for their offenses. Importantly, the nurses' scores in conviction proneness and criminal blameworthiness significantly predict negative attitudes toward the offenders even after controlling for their attitudes toward mental illness. Yet, when the nurses' conviction proneness and criminal blameworthiness were held constant, their attitudes toward mental illness failed to predict attitudes toward the offenders. This initial finding implies that the nurses' views regarding criminal blameworthiness and conviction may be more influential in understanding their attitudes toward offenders with mental illness relative to their attitudes toward mental illness.

Adjudicating mentally disordered offenders in Ghana: The criminal and mental health legislations

The involvement of mentally disordered offenders (MDOs) in the criminal justice system (CJS) is currently a major public health concern. This has culminated in several empirical researches over the years, with a particular focus on addressing the problem. The present study examines the criminal and the mental health legislations available to offenders raising fitness to stand trial issues, as well as those pleading insanity at the time of the offense (insanity defense) in Ghana. The legislations are examined within a framework of reducing the overrepresentation of MDOs in the CJS. In doing so, comparisons are made to similar legislations in other commonwealth jurisdictions, when necessary. Regarding fitness to stand trial, it is evident that the Ghanaian legislation does not contain discrete fitness indicators, relative to, for instance, Canada. Yet, it is interesting that the terminologies 'unsound mind' and 'incapable of making a defence' used in the proviso convey similar meaning and requirements to those used in other jurisdictions. The insanity defense standard, on the other hand, is also heavily influenced by the M'Naughton Rules in England. The defense consists of two separate cognitive tests, each of which can result in an acquittal. One of the tests strictly emphasizes knowledge of the nature and consequences of the act while knowledge of the wrongness of the criminal act is implied in the other. However, none of the tests takes into consideration uncontrollable impulse arising from mental disorder. The study proposes some revisions and amendments to the insanity legislation in its current formulation. Recommendations are also offered for critical areas that warrant research attention in relation to MDOs in Ghana, and in Africa as a whole.

A secondstep in development of a checklist for screening risk for violence in acute psychiatric patients: evaluation of interrater reliability of the Preliminary Scheme 33

The Acute Project is a research project conducted on acute psychiatric admission wards in Norway. The objective is to develop and validate a structured, easy-to-use screening checklist for assessment of risk for violence in patients both during their stay in the ward and after discharge. The Preliminary Scheme 33 is a 33-item screening checklist with content domain inspired by the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management Scheme (HCR-20), the Brøset Violence Checklist, and eight risk factors extracted from the literature on risk assessment. The Preliminary Scheme 33 was designed and tested in two steps by a research group which includes the authors. The common aim of both steps was to develop this into a time economical, reliable, and valid checklist. In the first step in 2006 the predictive validity of the individual items was tested. The present work presents results from the second step, a study conducted to assess the interrater reliability of the 33 items. Eight clinicians working in an acute psychiatric unit volunteered to be raters and were trained to score the 33 items on a three-point scale in relation to 15 clinical vignettes, which contained information from 15 acute psychiatric patients' files. Analysis showed high interrater reliability for the total score with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of .86 (95% CI: 0.74-0.94). However, a substantial proportion of the items had medium to low ICCs. Consequences of this finding for further development of these items into a brief screen are discussed.