Considering the impact of COVID-19 on suicide risk among individuals in prison and during reentry

Suicide Risk Screening and Assessment before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic in New Inmates

(1) Background: Suicide is the main cause of death in Italian prisons. The largest number of inmates who killed themselves was recorded during three years of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to explore psychosocial risk factors for suicide among inmates incarcerated before and after the onset of COVID-19. (2) Methods: At prison reception, inmates underwent clinical interviews and were assessed using the Blaauw Scale and Suicide Assessment Scale. Psychological distress, measured by the Symptom Checklist-90-R, was compared between inmates admitted before and after COVID-19. Regression analyses were run to examine psychosocial vulnerabilities associated with suicidal intent in newly incarcerated individuals at risk of suicide. (3) Results: Among the 2098 newly admitted inmates (93.7% male) aged 18 to 87 years (M = 39.93; SD = 12.04), 1347 met the criteria for suicide risk, and 98 exhibited high suicidal intent. Inmates who entered prison after the onset of COVID-19 were older and had fewer social relationships. They had a higher prevalence of recidivism and substance abuse, along with elevated levels of psychological distress. An increase in perceived loss of control, anergia, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, phobic anxiety, and paranoid ideation emerged as the factors most strongly associated with high suicidal intent. (4) Conclusions: These findings support the value of psychosocial screening in promptly identifying inmates at risk of suicide, enabling the implementation of targeted, multi-professional interventions. Future research should replicate these results, with a focus on longitudinal studies that monitor the same inmates throughout their incarceration period.

COVID-19 Restrictions In Jails And Prisons: Perspectives From Carceral Leaders

COVID-19 has been an unprecedented challenge in carceral facilities. As COVID-19 outbreaks spread in the US in early 2020, many jails, prisons, juvenile detention centers, and other carceral facilities undertook infection control measures such as increased quarantine and reduced outside visitation. However, the implementation of these decisions varied widely across facilities and jurisdictions. We explored how carceral decision makers grappled with ethically fraught public health challenges during the pandemic. We conducted semistructured interviews during May-October 2021 with thirty-two medical and security leaders from a diverse array of US jails and prisons. Although some facilities had existing detailed outbreak plans, most plans were inadequate for a rapidly evolving pandemic such as COVID-19. Frequently, this caused facilities to enact improvised containment plans. Quarantine and isolation were rapidly adopted across facilities in response to COVID-19, but in an inconsistent manner. Decision makers generally approached quarantine and isolation protocols as a logistical challenge, rather than an ethical one. Although they recognized the hardships imposed on incarcerated people, they generally saw the measures as justified. Comprehensive outbreak control guidelines for pandemic diseases in carceral facilities are urgently needed to ensure that future responses are more equitable and effective.

Public perceptions of psychiatric, justice-involved, and elderly populations during the COVID-19 pandemic

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has had a significant global impact, with all countries facing the challenge of mitigating its spread. An unprecedented shortage of medical resources has raised concerns regarding allocation and prioritization of supplies, which may exacerbate social discrepancies for already vulnerable populations. As public opinion can impact healthcare policies, we aimed to characterize perceptions of psychiatric, forensic psychiatry, correctional, and elderly populations regarding COVID-19-related issues. This web-based study recruited participants (n = 583) from the general population in North America. The survey included perceptions of the pandemic, hypothetical scenarios on resource prioritization, and Likert scale questions. The majority of participants were cisgender female (72.7%), aged 31-74 years (80.0%), married (48.0%), retired (52.7%), resided in Canada (73.9%), had a college/university degree (50.9%) and had never worked in healthcare (66.21%). Most respondents reported not having a criminal history (95.88%), or a psychiatric disorder (78.73%). Perceptions of vulnerable populations were significantly different for resource allocation and prioritization (e.g., ventilator and vaccine resources, all p < 0.001). Healthcare workers and the elderly were commonly ranked the highest priority for resources, while forensic psychiatry and correctional populations were given the lowest priority. A high rate of disagreement was found for the more stigmatizing questions in the survey (all p < 0.0001). Our results suggest that perception from members of the general public in North America is aligned with current practices for resource allocation. However, individuals that already face social and health disparities may face additional opposition in decision-making for COVID-19 resources.