An Ego-Centric Model of Criminal Arrest Among Mental Health Court Participant Network

People with serious mental illness are disproportionately represented among prison/jail populations. Mental health courts (MHC) serve as an alternative to incarceration. In this study, we explore the extent to which MHC participants have members of their social network who were reported as having a history of arrests. Multilevel logistic regression demonstrated friends who used drugs, race, and network density were all predictive of MHC participants’ friends who have a history of arrest. Results demonstrate an association between MHC participation and arrest among individuals in their social network. Given the importance of social support in recovery from mental illness and in desisting from crime, such limitations can be problematic. MHC participants may be disinclined to engage with the very individuals who are able to provide social and emotional support.

A Path to Restorative Justice: Applicability of Mental Health Courts in the Philippines

Described as ‘situated at the intersection of the criminal justice, mental health, substance abuse treatment, and other social systems’ 2 , Mental Health Courts (MHCs) are courts that deal with specialized interventions for defendants with mental illness. Aside from presenting options other than incarceration, they provide a distinct avenue for collaboration between the public and private sectors in developing mechanisms to address law and policy concerns regarding prisoner mental health. Originating from the United States, MHCs offer an innovative and targeted response to the current Philippine situation. While the recent passage of the Mental Health Act by Congress in 2018 has brought the fatality of mental illnesses and disorders to the fore, several gaps remain unaddressed. This article seeks to rectify the existing lacunae in the legal and policy framework by proposing the establishment of MHCs in the country. This shall be undertaken in five phases: First, to justify the needed reform, data must be gathered to determine the number of inmates suffering from a mental illness; second, the enactment or revision of mental health legislation and court rules; third, craft strategic plans to address budgetary concerns, which shall be done through the Philippine Council for Mental Health, as the mandated regulatory agency; fourth, forge linkages with the public and private sectors to increase awareness through advocacy while equipping judges and concerned personnel through a series of trainings; and fifth, conduct pilot testing in certain courts and periodic evaluations to ensure sustainability.

Role of Social Support and Ego Network Characteristics on Quality of Life

Mental health courts offer alternatives to incarceration for persons with severe mental illness who are involved in the criminal justice system. These courts have the dual function of ensuring treatment for persons involved in the court as well as ensuring the safety of the public. Persons with severe mental illness who are involved in mental health courts rely on others for support, such as family members. Others may buttress the participant from engaging in criminal activities and provide for needs of the participant. The supportiveness as well as the composition of one’s network members may play a role in the success of mental health court participants, such as successfully completing the mental health court program and avoiding incarceration. Little research has explored how social support impacts mental health court participants. We explored how the composition and sense of support of network members were associated with mental health court participants’ quality of life. We regressed quality of life on social support and network characteristics of 80 participants in two mental health courts. Findings suggest that perceived support is positively associated with quality of life, and the proportion of family in one’s network was negatively related to quality of life. Findings suggest that persons involved in mental health courts need supportive others in their social networks in addition to family. More research is needed to explore the reasons having a higher proportion of family members in one’s network is associated with lower quality of life. Practitioners need to pay attention to and leverage mental health court participants’ social networks to help improve their quality of life.

The Role of Mental Health Courts in Mitigating Family Violence

Mental health courts are one potential means to mitigate violence against family members by people with mental illness. This study identified the rate at which cases of family violence come before a mental health court and the success of defendants charged with assaulting family members. In a sample of 1,456 defendants eligible to participate in a mental health court, descriptive statistics were used to report rates of admission of defendants charged with assaulting family members and their characteristics; a static group design was used to compare post-program rearrests among defendants who assaulted family members who successfully completed the program, who did not complete the program, and who did not participate despite being eligible; and logistic regression was used to determine the effect of participation on rearrest when controlling for demographic and clinical factors. The study found that family violence occurred in 24.7% of admitted cases. Most eligible defendants who assaulted family members (75.8%) participated in the court program, and among those who did, 72.2% successfully completed the program. Defendants who assaulted family members and had a positive program termination had a much lower rate of rearrest post-program completion compared with those who did not complete the program or did not participate despite being eligible, a finding that held when controlling for other factors. This study suggests that mental health courts can be an effective option for mitigating family violence committed by people with mental illness.