Mental Health in the Era of Mass Incarceration

2022 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Nathaniel P. Morris ◽  
William R. Smith ◽  
Yaara Zisman-Ilani
Author(s):  
Jonathan Simon

In this chapter, Jonathan Simon argues that the modern criminal system should adopt the value of dignity as its governing ideal. The chapter argues that the legality principle—once a primary engine for strengthening the criminal system’s democratic legitimacy—has exhausted its sociological and jurisprudential power. Surveying 150 years of criminal legal commitments, this chapter shows how the legality principle rose to prominence as a vehicle for reform and accountability, and then fell under pressure from mass incarceration and institutional racism. Accordingly, the legality principle should be supplemented with a dignity principle, “an increasingly prominent value in legal systems internationally since the middle of the 20th century.” Simon traces the development of various forms of dignity in Supreme Court jurisprudence, from police procedure to prison conditions, determinate sentencing, and mental health. The chapter concludes that “the great banner reading ‘nulla poena sine lege’ must now be, not lowered, but joined by another banner of ‘no crime and no punishment without respect for human dignity.’”


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory G. Grecco ◽  
R. Andrew Chambers

AbstractIn 1939, British psychiatrist Lionel Penrose described an inverse relationship between mental health treatment infrastructure and criminal incarcerations. This relationship, later termed the ‘Penrose Effect’, has proven remarkably predictive of modern trends which have manifested as reciprocal components, referred to as ‘deinstitutionalization’ and ‘mass incarceration’. In this review, we consider how a third dynamic—the criminalization of addiction via the ‘War on Drugs’, although unanticipated by Penrose, has likely amplified the Penrose Effect over the last 30 years, with devastating social, economic, and healthcare consequences. We discuss how synergy been the Penrose Effect and the War on Drugs has been mediated by, and reflects, a fundamental neurobiological connection between the brain diseases of mental illness and addiction. This neuroscience of dual diagnosis, also not anticipated by Penrose, is still not being adequately translated into improving clinical training, practice, or research, to treat patients across the mental illness-addictions comorbidity spectrum. This failure in translation, and the ongoing fragmentation and collapse of behavioral healthcare, has worsened the epidemic of untreated mental illness and addictions, while driving unsustainable government investment into mass incarceration and high-cost medical care that profits too exclusively on injuries and multi-organ diseases resulting from untreated addictions. Reversing the fragmentation and decline of behavioral healthcare with decisive action to co-integrate mental health and addiction training, care, and research—may be key to ending criminalization of mental illness and addiction, and refocusing the healthcare system on keeping the population healthy at the lowest possible cost.


Partner Abuse ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-328
Author(s):  
Kenneth Corvo ◽  
Matthew Spitzmueller

Current domestic violence policy was shaped both by second wave feminist initiatives formulated in the 1970s and 1980s and by the culturally conservative concerns of the emerging punitive era. The policy framework that has emerged from the intersection of the seemingly incompatible positions of conservative views of crime and progressive feminist views of liberation in fact has come to resemble more conservative social control than progressive feminism. In spite of known empirical links between domestic violence and psychological disorders, this policy framework ignores many of the principles of forensic mental health practice. Growing awareness of the costs and failures of mass incarceration and the overcriminalization of certain behaviors is leading to a reconsideration of the role of mental health problems in crime overall. These trends may foreshadow a return to a more rehabilitative view of crime and corrections, presenting domestic violence policy with an opportunity to move toward a standpoint more scientific, more compassionate, and more effective.


Author(s):  
Anne E. Parsons

The introduction reviews the relevant histories of prisons, mental health policy, and the social welfare state. It highlights how recent scholarship has not connected the history of mental hospitals to the broader history of imprisonment. From Asylum to Prison frames historic mental hospitals as part of a broader carceral state and charts how the rise of mass incarceration shaped the closure of mental hospitals. Law and order politics served to criminalize mental health conditions and substance abuse. New prison construction in the 1980s took money away from mental health services and prisons absorbed many functions of the former mental health system. Finally, this history of deinstitutionalization offers lesson for people working to reduce mass incarceration in the twenty-first century United States. The introduction closes with a discussion of people-centered language and key terms such as institutions, carceral state, and mental illness.


Author(s):  
Kenneth L. Appelbaum

This chapter examines how incarceration affects public mental health and safety. It describes the benefits of mental health treatment during and after incarceration for individual patients and for society. It also reviews how the conditions of confinement can make inmates either better or worse, including the detrimental effects that harsh prison environments can have on future criminal behaviour. The chapter examines the history and misconceptions about rehabilitative programmes and the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions in reducing recidivism. It describes how mass incarceration has had great fiscal and social costs but few beneficial effects on crime rates. Finally, it reviews the advantages of alternatives to incarceration for individual offenders, family members, and the broader community.


Author(s):  
Anne E. Parsons

By the end of the 1960s, anti-institutionalism had extended beyond mental health and bled into prison reform. This chapter tracks the rise and fall of efforts to find alternatives to prisons. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, changes in psychiatry, politics, and the law led to a deinstitutionalization in both mental health and corrections policy making. Not only did politicians and advocates look for alternatives to mental hospitals, they also sought alternatives to prisons. They expanded probation, parole, and furlough and created community corrections initiatives such as halfway houses and work-release programs. The number of people in prisons and jails fell, even during a time of increased policing. These reforms came under attack, however, as politicians depicted people in prison as dangerous criminals and ushered in harsh sentencing reforms. A law and order politics that relied on racial discrimination halted efforts to deinstitutionalize prisons. By the mid-1970s, after more than a decade of decline, new prison construction began and the number of imprisoned people nationwide rose. These changes had a devastating effect on individuals with mental health conditions. Many of them were caught in the web of this new era of mass incarceration.


Author(s):  
Anne E. Parsons

The epilogue reflects on the contemporary crisis of mass incarceration in the United States, which has particularly affected people with mental health conditions and substance abuse disorders. It argues that today’s crisis is deeply rooted in the past history of mental health policy and offers a few main lessons for people working to make change. First, restrictive environments such as prisons and mental hospitals are inappropriate places to hold people on a mass scale. Second, it cautions people who are working to decarcerate prisons today. The history of deinstitutionalization proved that that cost-cutting cannot be the main reason for change, as it led to inadequate resources. People invested in prison reform should also be cautious that decarceration does not lead to new forms of restrictive environments, which happened during deinstitutionalization.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 799-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon L. Garrett ◽  
Alexander Jakubow ◽  
John Monahan

For almost two decades, Virginia has used risk assessment to justify “alternative” nonprison sentences for eligible drug and property offenders. In Study 1, we examined how frequently alternative sentences actually were imposed. We found that alternative sentences were given to only 42% of low-risk offenders. In Study 2, we tested the hypothesis that a lack of treatment resources explains why many judges fail to offer alternative sentences. We focused on the availability of mental health and substance abuse treatment resources across judicial circuits. Our findings support the “treatment resource hypothesis” as one explanation for variation among courts and judges in the extent to which alternative sentences are offered to low-risk offenders. To the extent that treatment resources available in a jurisdiction lead to increased judicial use of risk assessment to sentence low-risk offenders to nonjail alternatives, providing these resources will be crucial in reducing mass incarceration.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. A. Ioannidis

AbstractNeurobiology-based interventions for mental diseases and searches for useful biomarkers of treatment response have largely failed. Clinical trials should assess interventions related to environmental and social stressors, with long-term follow-up; social rather than biological endpoints; personalized outcomes; and suitable cluster, adaptive, and n-of-1 designs. Labor, education, financial, and other social/political decisions should be evaluated for their impacts on mental disease.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document