Procedural justice and the mental health court judge's role in reducing recidivism

How do perceptions of procedural justice, police legitimacy, and legitimacy of laws influence intentions to drug drive?

INTRODUCTION

There is a need for improved drug driving enforcement to promote greater driver compliance with drug driving laws. In Australia, Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) suffers from operational challenges that undermine its effectiveness in reducing drug driving.

OBJECTIVE

To identify potential improvements to RDT, this study investigated the extent to which drivers perceive RDT to be procedurally just and that the policing of drug driving and the associated laws are legitimate. These perceptions were then compared with those applying to Random Breath Testing (RBT) and examined in relation to their respective influence on intentions to drug and drink drive in the future.

METHOD

A sample of 1,483 licensed drivers from three Australian states completed an online survey.

RESULTS

Those participants who reported engaging in drug driving perceived RDT to be less procedurally just than non-drug drivers. Similarly, drug drivers perceived the police and associated drug driving laws to be less legitimate than non-drug drivers. Furthermore, drug drivers who had been tested at an RDT operation in the past perceived RDT to be less procedurally just and considered drug driving policing and laws to be less legitimate, compared with the corresponding perceptions of drink drivers who had been tested at an RBT operation. A regression analysis indicated that stronger intentions to drug drive in the future were associated with lower perceptions of police legitimacy and the legitimacy of drug driving laws, but not with the elements of procedural justice. However, follow-up analyses indicated that the influence of procedural justice on intentions was mediated by the two legitimacy variables, thus weakening its direct impact on intentions.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

The results highlight the need for road safety authorities to enhance the perceived legitimacy of drug driving enforcement and associated laws. Changes to current police practices and/or drug-driving laws may also be needed to enhance the effectiveness of RDT.

Client attitudes toward virtual treatment court

Introduction

As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many treatment courts shifted to offering teleservices. We sought to examine the barriers that clients faced when transitioning to virtual court and treatment, and how this transition impacted their perceptions of the treatment court experience.

Methods

The National Center for State Courts administered an online survey between January 1, 2021, and July 31, 2021, deployed to state and local court administrators, which resulted in 1356 unique client responses from 121 courts. The survey measured attitudes about the treatment court process, including interactions with the judge, the behavioral health treatment staff, and treatment groups, as well as barriers to virtual and in-person court. We hypothesized that clients with fewer technological barriers to virtual service, who shifted to virtual court or treatment, would report more positive attitudes to this service delivery.

Results

Clients felt more comfortable participating in virtual court sessions than in-person sessions but were less likely to feel like the judge was familiar with their case during virtual court sessions. From the treatment perspective, clients felt more connected with other group members and reported greater benefit from treatment staff when treatment services were delivered in-person, but clients felt less anxious when treatment groups were virtual.

Conclusions

Even though virtual experiences were more comfortable than in-person experiences for clients, the results are nuanced and show preference for some in-person connections as they transitioned to virtual connections. Future research should examine how to improve client connections with staff/group members during virtual court or treatment sessions, particularly as courts and treatment providers are likely to continue some services virtually into the future.

Essential Elements of Forensic Assertive Community Treatment

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Assess characteristics of forensic assertive community treatment programs.

ABSTRACT

Forensic assertive community treatment (FACT) has emerged internationally as an intervention strategy for people with serious mental disorders who are involved with the criminal justice system. Studies to date have shown marked variability, however, in FACT program design and operation. Based upon a literature review and relevant experience, the authors present their perspective on the essential elements of FACT. Given that FACT is an adaptation of the evidence-based assertive community treatment (ACT) model, it is recommended that FACT programs maintain a high-fidelity ACT component. FACT programs should also have both mental health and criminal justice admission criteria because service recipients are involved in both service systems. For optimal effectiveness, FACT team clinicians must partner with criminal justice agencies that provide community-based supervision to their patients. Prospective FACT enrollees should receive a clear explanation of the program, including how their respective mental health and criminal justice service providers will work collaboratively with them to prevent incarceration. FACT programs should also use risk/need assessment to inform treatment planning, evidence-based mental health and community correctional practices to promote both wellness and public safety, and shared training to promote effective collaboration. Additional elements to consider include housing, medical care, and transitional services. These elements are presented and discussed, including a rationale and evidence to support each component. The article concludes with introduction of a FACT fidelity scale, the Rochester Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Scale (R-FACTS). By operationalizing essential FACT elements, the R-FACTS is designed to support FACT program development, implementation, and dissemination in a more consistent and measurable manner.

Adaptations and Innovations to Minimize Service Disruption for Patients with Severe Mental Illness during COVID-19: Perspectives and Reflections from an Assertive Community Psychiatry Program

Changes to community psychiatry during COVID-19 are unprecedented and without clear guidelines. Minimizing disruption, ensuring quality care to the already vulnerable people with serious mental illness is crucial. We describe and reflect our adaptations and innovations at one community psychiatry program, based on three key principles. In (i) Defining and maintaining essential services while limiting risk of contagion, we discuss such strategies and ways to assess risks, implement infection control, and other creative solutions. In (ii) Promoting health and mitigating physical and mental health impacts, we reflect on prioritizing vulnerable patients, dealing with loss of community resources, adapting group programs, and providing psychoeducation, among others. In (iii) Promoting staff resilience and wellness, we describe building on strength of the staff early, addressing staff morale and avoiding moral injury, and valuing responsive leadership. We also identify limitations and potential further improvements, mindful that COVID-19 and similar crises are likely recurring realities.

Experiences of involuntary psychiatric admission decision-making: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of the perspectives of service users, informal carers, and professionals

BACKGROUND

In involuntary psychiatric admission, used globally, professionals or caretakers decide upon hospitalization regardless of what the person with psychosocial disabilities decides. This raises clinical, ethical, legal, and human rights concerns, and it goes against Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). CRPD mandates that member states respect the autonomy of people with disabilities. Through Article 12, it recognizes full enjoyment of legal capacity for persons with disabilities. Implementation of Article 12 is challenging in every country, and exploring all the stakeholders' experiences at admission decision-making will help us to understand the challenges that the current psychiatry system poses for service users to exercise their autonomy and identify the areas where service users need support to have their rights, will, and preferences respected.

AIM

To describe the experiences of service users, informal carers, and professionals in involuntary psychiatric admission decision-making and throughout the subsequent involuntary admission. We explored the support that the service users need to have their rights, will, and preferences respected.

METHOD

A search of twelve databases in medicine, sociology, and law in Danish, English, Japanese, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish, and Swedish was conducted in 2017 and 2018, limited to the past 10 years, using terms such as "involuntary," "admission," "mental illness," and "experience". The search identified 682 articles. Four researchers independently reviewed the articles to find those that completed original qualitative or mixed method studies exploring experiences of involuntary psychiatric admission among adults. We added seven publications from the articles' references, contacted experts in the field (no publications were added), and excluded two articles that were in German. Three researchers analyzed the articles' results using Thematic Analysis (PROSPERO registration number CRD42019072874).

RESULTS

Overall, 37 articles were included from 11 countries; they involved 731 service users, 100 informal carers, and 291 mental health professionals. We identified a lack of communication and a power imbalance among the stakeholders, which was exacerbated by the professionals' attitudes. At admission decision-making, the service users wanted to be heard and wanted to understand the situation. The families felt responsibility for the service users, they were careful not to ruin relationships, and they struggled to obtain support from the mental health system. Professionals believed that threats or harming others should lead to admission regardless of what the service users or their families felt. Professionals sometimes felt that it was not necessary to explain the information to the service users because they would not understand. Professionals were concerned and frustrated with difficulties in coordinating among themselves. During admission, service users struggled with the ward environment and relationship with staff; they most objected to coercion, such as forced medication. Families were frustrated that they were not involved in the treatment planning, especially as the service users moved toward discharge. The professionals often rationalized that coercion was necessary, and they believed that they knew what was best for the service users.

CONCLUSIONS

A lack of communication and a power imbalance among the stakeholders hindered respect for the service users' rights, will, and preferences. This was exacerbated by professionals rationalizing coercion and assuming that service users were incapable of understanding information. Services that encourage communication and overcome power imbalances (e.g. Crisis Plans, Family Group Conferencing) combined with stronger community mental health support will respect service users' rights, will, and preferences and avoid substituted decision-making on issues such as involuntary admission and forced medication.

Deciding to participate in mental health court: Exploring participant perspectives

As the number of mental health courts (MHC) expands across the United States, so does the body of research demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing criminal recidivism. While there has been considerable research conducted on MHC operations, less is known about how individuals decide to participate in MHCs. Data from in-depth interviews with 26 MHC participants from two MHCs in the United States were analyzed using grounded dimensional and thematic analyses. Results suggest that individuals participated in MHC to avoid incarceration and obtain treatment. Participants understood the court to function in four distinct ways: 1) to help through service provision, 2) to structure a judicial agreement allowing MHCs to make treatment decisions in exchange for community living, 3) to protect people from risks within the criminal justice system, and 4) to reward participants for treatment adherence. Findings can be used to guide the need for policy and practice for those referring to MHCs.

The Value of Dignity in Prison: A Qualitative Study with Life Convicts

Background: This research is based on the perspective of dignity according to Chochinov; thus, the life imprisonment of detainees is assimilated to a severe disease. Methods: Ten male prisoners were interviewed trough Chochinov’s Dignity Therapy, and the results were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Two areas of thematic prevalence emerged, namely, value of freedom, self-consciousness and education and their failure in jail, and life sentence as annihilation of life meaning and of the values of generativity and family. Conclusions: Life imprisonment has been described in its negativity by several respondents as a punishment worse than the death penalty. It has been compared to death itself, to a terminal illness, to torture and to a pain that grows over the years, with the awareness that despite the passing of time, you will not have the opportunity to return to your loved one and to a free life. In fact, prisoners live out their condition within a space in which any value that gives meaning to life risks being destroyed.

The impact of mental health court: A Sacramento case study

Mental health courts (MHCs) use a collaborative justice approach to provide a therapeutic alternative to the traditional justice process for defendants with mental illnesses directly relevant to their alleged criminal offenses. MHCs have proliferated in recent years, in light of early research reports documenting their successes. The aim of this paper is to provide further evaluation of the effects of MHCs by evaluating the impact of the Sacramento County MHC in California. We analyzed quantitative data and conducted interviews with stakeholders and MHC participants to understand how the MHC influenced individual participants' recidivism rates, mental health, and quality of life. Results from the quantitative data analysis indicate that defendants had a lower rate of recidivism after the MHC program than before it. Moreover, graduates were less likely to be rearrested and rehospitalized than non-graduates. Qualitative analyses revealed several core themes regarding participants' views on facilitators and barriers related to the MHC's success. These findings provide further insights into the effectiveness of MHCs.

Criminal Justice Professionals' Attitudes Toward Mental Illness and Substance Use

Despite the high prevalence of behavioral health disorders in justice settings and prior research on the importance of attitudes in successful treatment outcomes for behavioral health populations, few studies have examined criminal justice professionals' attitudes toward mental illness and substance use. We conducted a state-wide survey of 610 criminal justice professionals using items adapted from the Drug and Drug Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (Albery et al. 2003) to examine attitudes toward mental illness and substance use as a function of criminal justice position and personal contact. For attitudes toward both mental illness and substance use, defense attorneys and community corrections officers reported more positive attitudes relative to jail correctional staff and prosecutors. For attitudes toward substance use, personal contact moderated the effect of position on attitudes. Findings underscore the importance of targeted training and other contact-based interventions to improve criminal justice professionals' attitudes toward behavioral health populations.

A pilot study exploring mental health consumers' experiences with the police

Police encounters with people experiencing mental illness are both common and problematic. While there is an international body of literature on police officers' perceptions of mental-health-related incidents, few studies have sought to understand these encounters from the perspectives of people experiencing mental illness. This pilot study recruited 26 people through a state-wide Consumer Advisory Group who completed an online survey regarding their encounters with police. Results indicated that when people perceived procedurally just treatment from police they were more likely to co-operate with them and to evaluate the encounter positively. The nature of police involvement and levels of internalised stigma moderated the association between perceived procedural justice and their evaluation. Prior contacts were also important in shaping participants' overall attitudes towards police. Findings highlight the importance of officers treating people experiencing mental illness fairly and respectfully to facilitate peaceful encounters and help foster more positive perceptions of the police.

Perspective Differences in Trial Process: A Comparison of Judges, Juries and Litigants

Classic studies on judge-juror agreement have converged on the finding that judges and jurors agree on the outcomes in most cases (71-75%). This study extends these findings by comparing trial process evaluations of judges, jurors and litigants in actual civil trials. The results suggest that judges and juries largely overlap in their perceptions of trial process measures (e.g. case complexity). However, judicial and jury perceptions often differ from litigants' perceptions. The way in which different perspectives of the trial process predict satisfaction with the outcome is also explored. Litigant, but not judicial or jury, perceptions of the trial process were found to predict satisfaction. These results support past research concerning judge-juror agreement, but suggest there is less agreement between objective (i.e. judges and jurors) and subjective (i.e. litigants) perspectives of the trial process.

Examining changes in procedural justice and their influence on problem-solving court outcomes

The number of problem-solving courts has grown substantially since the mid-1990s. Research consistently indicates that participation in these courts lowers recidivism, which is often attributed to defendants' increased perceptions of procedural justice in these programs. Yet, prior studies are limited in their focus, often examining interactions with the judge in a single court or examining defendant perceptions and outcomes at a single time point. In the present study, we investigate defendant perceptions of procedural justice with judges and case managers across multiple problem-solving courts over time. Findings indicate that procedural justice varies across court actors and over time. Procedural justice is lower among judges than among case managers; however, changes in perceptions of procedural justice with the judge are associated with improved court outcomes. We suggest that defendant perceptions are variable and complex but important in explaining variations in outcomes.

Gender and mental health: An examination of procedural justice in a specialized court context

The procedural justice framework has been applied in the criminal justice contexts of policing, corrections, and courts. According to this perspective, fair treatment, respectful dialogue and being given a proper voice will contribute to citizens' positive views of authority figures. While this literature has grown immensely, several questions remain unanswered. Do males and females perceive similar levels of procedural justice? Does mental health status influence perceptions of fair treatment? Whether procedural justice is a general perspective that can be applied across social groupings has important implications for correctional treatment in that programs that truly "work" for all are more cost-effective. Toward that end, the current study investigates the relationships among procedural justice perceptions, gender, and mental health status in specialized drug courts, a context that has received little empirical attention. We do so using secondary data originally collected between 2003 and 2009 for Rossman, Roman, Zweig, Rempel and Lindquist's Multisite Adult Drug Court Evaluation (MADCE). Results from a full-sample analysis reveal that women report higher levels of procedural justice; that drug court participation significantly influences procedural justice perceptions; and that depressive symptomology is a significant predictor of procedural justice perceptions. In male- and female-specific subsamples, drug court participation exerts similar effects for males and females, as does depressive symptomology. Implications for theory, research, and practice are discussed.

Preventing Criminal Recidivism Through Mental Health and Criminal Justice Collaboration

Criminal justice system involvement is common among persons with serious mental illness in community treatment settings. Various intervention strategies are used to prevent criminal recidivism among justice-involved individuals, including mental health courts, specialty probation, and conditional release programs. Despite differences in these approaches, most involve the use of legal leverage to promote treatment adherence. Evidence supporting the effectiveness of leverage-based interventions at preventing criminal recidivism is mixed, however, with some studies suggesting that involving criminal justice authorities in mental health treatment can increase recidivism rates. The effectiveness of interventions that utilize legal leverage is likely to depend on several factors, including the ability of mental health and criminal justice staff to work together. Collaboration is widely acknowledged as essential in managing justice-involved individuals, yet fundamental differences in goals, values, and methods exist between mental health and criminal justice professionals. This article presents a six-step conceptual framework for optimal mental health-criminal justice collaboration to prevent criminal recidivism among individuals with serious mental illness who are under criminal justice supervision in the community. Combining best practices from each field, the stepwise process includes engagement, assessment, planning and treatment, monitoring, problem solving, and transition. Rationale and opportunities for collaboration at each step are discussed.

Re: Mental health rehabilitation in therapeutic jurisprudence: Theoretical improvements

Legal scholarship relevant to criminal court mental health initiatives that divert people with mental illness from prosecution to treatment has created the concept of therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ), an approach that seeks to maximize the law's potential for therapeutic outcomes. Despite recognition that TJ includes a rehabilitative response as a key animating principle and that it advocates for interdisciplinary synthesis, TJ has developed mainly from within the practice and discipline of law and without reference to the discipline of rehabilitation science, in which approaches to mental health rehabilitation (MHR) have witnessed significant developments in recent decades. In particular, concepts of MHR have shifted from a biomedical focus to a psychosocial approach, such as the recovery model, that incorporates values of self-determination, independence, and empowerment. It is argued that greater consideration of MHR will improve the theoretical validity of TJ by 1) helping define what 'therapeutic' means; 2) constructing a normative framework; and 3) broadening the scope of TJ as an interdisciplinary approach. More research is needed to ensure concepts from MHR rehabilitation science are considered in TJ legal scholarship and criminal court mental health initiatives.

A theoretical evaluation of a youth mental health court program model

Mental health courts are a promising new approach to addressing the overrepresentation of mental health needs among offender populations, yet little is known about how they facilitate change, particularly for youth. The current study reports on a process evaluation of a youth mental health court in Toronto, Canada. Drawing upon observations of the court and interviews with key informants, we developed a program model of the court and explored its implementation within the context of empirical evidence for treating justice-involved youth. Findings revealed that the proposed mechanism of change, which focuses on reducing recidivism through the treatment of mental health needs, should also consider factors directly related to offending behavior. Findings further highlight several strengths of the program, including the program's supportive environment and ability to engage and link youth and families with treatment. Areas for continued growth include the need for comprehensive protections of legal rights.

The Impact of Psychological Science on Policing in the United States

The May 2015 release of the report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing highlighted a fundamental change in the issues dominating discussions about policing in America. That change has moved discussions away from a focus on what is legal or effective in crime control and toward a concern for how the actions of the police influence public trust and confidence in the police. This shift in discourse has been motivated by two factors—first, the recognition by public officials that increases in the professionalism of the police and dramatic declines in the rate of crime have not led to increases in police legitimacy, and second, greater awareness of the limits of the dominant coercive model of policing and of the benefits of an alternative and more consensual model based on public trust and confidence in the police and legal system. Psychological research has played an important role in legitimating this change in the way policymakers think about policing by demonstrating that perceived legitimacy shapes a set of law-related behaviors as well as or better than concerns about the risk of punishment. Those behaviors include compliance with the law and cooperation with legal authorities. These findings demonstrate that legal authorities gain by a focus on legitimacy. Psychological research has further contributed by articulating and demonstrating empirical support for a central role of procedural justice in shaping legitimacy, providing legal authorities with a clear road map of strategies for creating and maintaining public trust. Given evidence of the benefits of legitimacy and a set of guidelines concerning its antecedents, policymakers have increasingly focused on the question of public trust when considering issues in policing. The acceptance of a legitimacy-based consensual model of police authority building on theories and research studies originating within psychology illustrates how psychology can contribute to the development of evidence-based policies in the field of criminal law.

The experiences of the legal processes of involuntary treatment orders: tension between the legal and medical frameworks

3An involuntary treatment order (ITO) allows a person to be treated for a mental illness without consent under some circumstances. While the treatment and assessment of mental illness are essentially clinical decisions, involuntary mental health admissions are governed by a framework of legal principles, safeguards and procedures. The underlying philosophy of these laws is based on therapeutic jurisprudence. This approach focuses on the importance of the legal process as a social force and suggests that this can either protect or empower people. The legal processes can however adversely impact upon people's states of mind. This study reports on 25 qualitative interviews with involuntary inpatients of a major teaching hospital. The interviews were analysed thematically using a general inductive approach. The analysis focused on the patients' general experience of being placed under an ITO and their understanding of the ITO process. Generally, those who described the experience of an ITO in more positive terms, also experienced the ITO as a positive right. In addition to providing them with the treatment needed, they also felt that the ITO gave them protection and guidance. Conversely, those who experienced being placed under an ITO in more negative or mixed ways, described feeling powerless in the process, as they felt that the ITO took away their rights. By and large the ITO process was experienced as arbitrary when patients did not understand the reasons for their admission. In addition, these patients had limited or no information about their involuntary treatment order and they did not know what was expected of them to have the ITO revoked. Most importantly, they did not feel that there were any meaningful legal protections in place. These experiences highlight the importance of the legal processes and how these can be used as clinical tools.

Why do mental health courts work? A confluence of treatment, support & adroit judicial supervision

The article contributes to the understanding of 'what works' in mental health courts (MHCs). There are now almost 400 MHCs in the US and more worldwide. A substantial body of evidence demonstrates that MHCs can succeed in reducing recidivism among offenders who suffer mental disorders. This article argues that MHCs succeed when they have achieved the right confluence of essential elements, including providing evidence-based treatment and psychosocial supports and using adroit judge-craft. After a brief review of some of the studies demonstrating MHC success, this article discusses the research into the necessary foundations of rehabilitation programs. It is argued that, although treatment and psychosocial services should be supplied within an evidence-based framework, neither of the two leading conceptual models - Risk-Needs-Responsivity and the Good Lives Model - are empirically proven with offenders who suffer from mental disorders. Despite the absence of proof, the Good Lives Model is argued to be appropriate for MHCs because it is normatively consonant with therapeutic jurisprudence. The MHC judge is another essential element. The judicial role is assayed to elucidate how it functions to promote the rehabilitation of offenders with mental disorders. It is argued that the role of the MHC judge during supervisory status hearings is to establish a therapeutic alliance and practice motivational psychology with each MHC participant.

Long-term recidivism of mental health court defendants

The first MHC was established in 1997 and now, over 15years later, there are over 300 mental health courts in the United States. In a relatively short time these courts have become an established criminal justice intervention for persons with a mental illness. However, few studies have looked at the long-term outcomes of MHCs on criminal recidivism. Of the studies evaluating the impact of MHCs on criminal recidivism, most follow defendants after entry into the court during their participation, and only a few have followed defendants after court exit for periods of one or two years. This study follows MHC defendants for a minimum of five years to examine recidivism post-exit with particular attention to MHC completion's effect. Findings show that 53.9% of all MHC defendants were rearrested in the follow-up and averaged 15months to rearrest. Defendants who completed MHC were significantly less likely to be rearrested (39.6% vs. 74.8%), and went longer before recidivating (17.15months vs. 12.27months) than those who did not complete. This study suggests that MHCs can reduce criminal recidivism among offenders with mental illness and that this effect is sustained for several years after defendants are no longer under the court's supervision.

Perceptions and experiences of people with mental illness regarding their interactions with police

This study examined the perceptions and lived experiences of people with mental illness in relation to their interactions with the police. A community-based participatory research approach was used and a procedural justice theoretical perspective guided the study. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted by peer researchers with 60 people with mental illness who had interacted with the police and were living in Metro Vancouver, Canada. Among the study participants, contact with the police was frequent and occurred under a diverse range of circumstances. The majority of participants perceived being treated in a procedurally just manner by the police officer(s) who were involved in their most recent interaction. Almost three-quarters (n=43, 72%) of participants were generally satisfied with how the police officer(s) had handled their most recent interaction. The slight majority of participants (n=30, 51%) rated their previous contacts with the police as a positive experience overall, with 32% (n=19) indicating that their previous interactions with the police were negative life experiences. The findings paint a more balanced picture than that which is often portrayed by the media. Emphasizing a procedural justice framework for police handling of situations involving people with mental illness is a vital step toward improving how these interactions are experienced and perceived.

Procedural justice and the judge-probationer relationship in a co-occurring disorders court

Although a considerable amount of research has been conducted on treatment-based courts, there is little quantitative evidence that describes the relationship between the judge and the probationer. The present study examines perceptions of the judge-probationer relationship (JPR), procedural justice, and outcome satisfaction within a co-occurring disorders court (CODC) in Orange County, California. Based on interview and survey data from a sample of probationers within the CODC (n=24), this article argues that perceptions of procedural justice are linked to perceptions of relationship quality between the judge and probationer. Analysis of the data found that probationers in the CODC have very positive views of their relationships with the judge, and elements of relationship quality are significantly linked with perceptions of procedural justice. Procedural justice is also a predictor of satisfaction with outcome in this sample. The results show promise that procedural justice and the quality of the judge-probationer relationship can positively affect probationers with co-occurring disorders in specialty courts.

What influences perceptions of procedural justice among people with mental illness regarding their interactions with the police?

According to procedural justice theory, a central factor shaping perceptions about authority figures and dispute resolution processes is whether an individual believes they were treated justly and fairly during personal encounters with agents of authority. This paper describes findings from a community-based participatory research study examining perceptions of procedural justice among sixty people with mental illness regarding their interactions with police. The degree to which these perceptions were associated with selected individual (e.g., socio-demographic characteristics), contextual (e.g., neighborhood, past experiences), and interactional (e.g., actions of the officer) factors was explored. The results of regression analyses indicate that the behavior of police officers during the interactions appears to be the key to whether or not these interactions are perceived by people with mental illness as being procedurally just. Implications of these findings for improving interactions between the police and people with mental illness are discussed.

Procedural justice in mental health courts: judicial practices, participant perceptions, and outcomes related to mental health recovery

Research on mental health courts (MHCs) to date has been disproportionately focused on the study of recidivism and reincarceration over the potential of these problem solving courts to facilitate the recovery process and affect the slope of recovery. This study attempts to shift the focal point of interest from well-established criminal justice outcomes to the experiences and perceptions of MHC participants. The authors hypothesize that the actions of MHC judges that are consistent with procedural justice theory will engender high perceptions of procedural justice among this sample of divertees with SMI. Defendant perceptions of procedural justice in 4 NYC-area MHCs were also compared to those of uninvolved observers. Results suggest that defendant perceptions are distinct from observer perceptions, which tended to be more sensitive to the differences in judges between the four courts. Overall, participants' perceptions of procedural justice were moderate and increased between baseline and 4-month follow-up. Procedural justice was negatively correlated with symptoms at baseline and was positively correlated with participant's attitudes toward their own recovery. Between baseline and 4-month follow-up, participants in our sample tended to increase in perceptions of procedural justice; interestingly, the increase in procedural justice was associated with a decrease in symptoms but not to an increase in attitudes toward the recovery. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Recognition and understanding of goals and roles: The key internal features of mental health court teams

The increasing involvement of people with mental illness in the criminal justice system has led to the formation of specialty programs such as mental health courts (hereafter MHCs). We discuss MHCs and the teams serving these courts. Specifically, we examine team members' perceptions of MHC goals and their own and others' roles on the MHC team. Using a semi-structured interview instrument, we conducted 59 face-to-face interviews with criminal justice and mental health treatment personnel representing 11 Ohio MHCs. Findings from our qualitative data analyses reveal that MHC personnel understand individuals' roles within the teams, recognize and appreciate the importance of different roles, and share common goals. MHCs could foster this level of understanding and agreement by working to recruit and retain individuals with experience in or willingness to learn about both the criminal justice and mental health systems. Future research should explore the impact of MHC team functioning on client outcomes.

A testable theory of problem solving courts: Avoiding past empirical and legal failures

Recent years have seen a proliferation of problem solving courts designed to rehabilitate certain classes of offenders and thereby resolve the underlying problems that led to their court involvement in the first place. Some commentators have reacted positively to these courts, considering them an extension of the philosophy and logic of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, but others show concern that the discourse surrounding these specialty courts has not examined their process or outcomes critically enough. This paper examines that criticism from historical and social scientific perspectives. The analysis culminates in a model that describes how offenders are likely to respond to the process as they engage in problem solving court programs and the ways in which those courts might impact subsequent offender conduct. This Therapeutic Jurisprudence model of problem solving courts draws heavily on social cognitive psychology and more specifically on theories of procedural justice, motivation, and anticipated emotion to offer an explanation of how offenders respond to these programs. We offer this model as a lens through which social scientists can begin to address the concern that there is not enough critical analysis of the process and outcome of these courts. Applying this model to specialty courts constitutes an important step in critically examining the contribution of problem solving courts.